 | The Oil Drum BookCollage -#2 of 3 - "Human Capital", How-to Books, etc. | The Oil Drum | A Few More Thoughts Related to Pedro Prieto's "NINJA" Post |  |
DrumBeat: May 28, 2009
Posted by Leanan on May 28, 2009 - 9:55am
The Peak Oil Crisis: The Electric Car: Part II
Unless we have an economic depression far worse than most currently believe is likely, the chances are good that within the next five years a combination of emissions restrictions and falling oil supplies is going to make gasoline too expensive for routine use in private automobiles.The manufacturers recognize this and are rushing to produce pure electric or plug-in hybrid cars that will draw most of their energy consumption from the electric grid. The following is the second part of a discussion of a recent announcement by Nissan that they will be introducing the first full size electric sedan in the U.S. late next year.
Edison May Cancel Italy-Greece Pipe on Lack of Gas
(Bloomberg) -- Edison SpA, a Milan-based utility, may have to cancel a planned pipeline between Italy and Greece if it can’t secure natural-gas supplies from the Shah Deniz field in Azerbaijan.Supply talks have been stalled by Turkey, which wants to be a gas trader rather than a transit state, Edison Development Manager Mario Cumbat said today at a conference in Paris. Shipments must be agreed on by the end of the year or Edison may be forced to buy gas from Russia’s OAO Gazprom, he said.
Kurdistan goes glug glug: The federal government is letting Iraq’s Kurds export from their new oilfields
ON JUNE 1st a man in a hard hat in the blazing sun will ritually turn a switch to let oil flow through a pipeline. In oil-rich Iraq that should not warrant comment. But this operation, at the Tawke oilfield near Iraq’s northern frontier with Turkey, will be beamed live to a giant screen in a new conference centre in Erbil, capital of Iraq’s self-ruling Kurdistan region. Hundreds of leading Kurds will cheer as they watch pictures of oil being offloaded from tankers at an export facility at Khurmala, south-west of Erbil, from which it will be pumped to Baiji and into the same northbound pipeline (see map).
Angola July crude exports to hit 1.86 million bpd:trade
LONDON (Reuters) - Angola is set to export about 1.86 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil in July, rising from the 1.72 million bpd previously expected, traders said on Thursday.
Is Oil Going the Wrong Way, Or Do We Need to Adjust Our Perceptions?
It's high time to write a comprehensive post on recent oil price movement. Since my last post on April 16, WTI crude has gone up from $49.97 to $64.40 as of the time of writing, which is a 29% jump in a month and a half.I must confess that it's been quite painful to watch even though that I have considered the possibility of such a scenario suggesting that oil could rise to $60, but such a move would make it the perfect short idea at that time. I now have to admit that my confidence has gone down a lot since then, and I don't think shorting oil now is the best idea.
Western European Power Trading Rose to Record in 2008
(Bloomberg) -- Electricity trading in western Europe’s seven biggest markets advanced to a fourth straight annual record in 2008 as prices reached all-time highs, spurring speculation.Volumes rose 6 percent to 9,916 terawatt-hours across Germany, the Nordic region, Britain, France, the Netherlands, Spain and Italy, London-based consultant Prospex Research Ltd. said today in a report.
Global warming must stay below 2C or world faces ruin, scientists declare
The world’s carbon emissions must peak within just six years, if humanity is to stand a chance of preventing dangerous global warming, a group of 20 Nobel Prize-winning scientists, economists and writers has declared.Greenhouse gas emissions will have to fall by 50 per cent from 1990 levels by 2050, to keep global temperature increases below 2C, the St James’s Palace Nobel Laureate Symposium has declared. Developed countries must aim for a reduction of between 25 and 40 per cent by 2020.
UAE to revise plans for gas expansion
The UAE is facing a severe gas supply shortage and an expected deterioration in the crisis could force it to revise plans to expand its LNG production, an Abu Dhabi gas official warned yesterday.Despite a steady rise in domestic gas output, the shortage has widened over the past few years because of a surge in domestic consumption, prompting some power plants to use costlier diesel fuel, said Hamed Al Marzouqi, acting head of the market research at Abu Dhabi Gas Liquefaction Company (Adgas).
Shrinking Europe Gas Market Could Impact US Gas Market
New forecasts for European natural gas demand are calling into question the role Russian natural gas will play in the continent's supply mix. Long-term, the European gas market outlook has implications for the U.S. gas market. IHS Global Insight says it expects European gas demand to fall by almost 10% this year, which will pressure Russian gas suppliers hoping to capture a larger share of the continental market. The problems last winter over the delivery of Russian gas to Eastern Europe that resulted in thousands of people shivering in their homes prompted a recent meeting between EU and Russian officials to attempt to resolve the gas delivery issue permanently. However, based on media reports, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev refused to grant assurances to EU consumers that future gas supply cutoffs might not happen again. In fact, he said he doubted that transit state, Ukraine, through which the gas flows, had enough money to pay for the gas Russia supplies, suggesting that future disruptions are likely.
Sakhalin II Gears Up for Full Production
The last major offshore gas well is being completed at the Lunskoye platform in Russia's sub-Arctic Sea of Okhotsk preparing the way for full production capacity of liquefied natural gas (LNG) at Sakhalin II, one of the world's largest integrated oil and gas projects.
Tighter loan structure puts brakes on ME project finance
Project financing has substantially dropped due to the financial crisis. The project finance market has also seen a number of changes including a shorter tenure and maturity terms and a tighter loan structure, senior executives told a conference in Dubai yesterday.This happened because of a significant decline of active banks in the market fuelled primarily by a lack of liquidity in the financial system, said Thomas Waterhouse, Joint General Manager and Head of Energy and Natural Resources at Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation Europe. In addition, the disappearance of regional banks in the project finance sector, the lack of foreign currency and the impact of the correcting real estate market aggravated the problem.
Ships Moving Fuel Oil East Double as Arbitrage Gives Incentive
(Bloomberg) -- The number of supertankers transporting fuel oil to Asian markets from the Caribbean between March and May has doubled since a year ago as traders seize on a profitable arbitrage, shipbrokers said.Traders can take advantage of the price difference for fuel oil between the two markets, which is now greater than the cost to charter a vessel. Petroleos Mexicanos, China National Petroleum Corp., Glencore Holdings AG and Chemoil Energy Ltd. have chartered ships since the end of last month, according to shipping data compiled by Bloomberg.
Forget low oil prices. The worry of the moment is a spike in oil prices and how long it will take before a supply crunch sends prices soaring.And if one subscribes to the views of former CIBC World Markets economist Jeff Rubin and University of California, San Diego economics professor James Hamilton, a spike in prices could send the world tumbling back into recessionary territory, just as it is about to climb out of it.
The price of crude today and historically
With the price of crude oil on the rise, how does it compare now to the long-term average?Oil, at about $63 (U.S.) a barrel, is well below the peak of $147 it hit last summer, but the price is still substantially above its long-term average.
Of course, that average depends on when you start the calculations.
Oil's Move Could Fuel E&P Deals
With crude oil trading above $60 a barrel for the first time since November, the oil exploration and production sector looks ripe for a new wave of mergers and acquisitions.
NOAA Hurricane Forecast Consistent With CSU Projections
Last week the U.S. Government's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) issued its first forecast for the upcoming storm season suggesting a "near-normal" Atlantic hurricane season. In NOAA's press release announcing its forecast, the agency put a 50% probability for a "near-normal" season, a 25% probability for an "above-normal" season and a 25% probability for a "below-normal" season. NOAA uses probabilities and ranges in its forecast. They estimate a 70% chance that there will be nine to 14 named storms this season with four to seven becoming hurricanes and three of them major hurricanes (Category 3, 4 or 5).
Apache Prosecuted by West Australia for Varanus Blast
(Bloomberg) -- Apache Corp., the second-largest independent U.S. oil producer by market value, will be prosecuted over a Western Australian gas pipeline blast that cut 30 percent of the state’s supply and cost its economy an estimated A$2 billion ($1.6 billion).
Major GM bondholders OK revised deal
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The Treasury Department and a committee of major bondholders at General Motors have reached a deal that could give creditors a larger stake in GM than previously offered as long as they agree not to fight the government's plans for a quick bankruptcy at GM.
Palin stands alone on a shrinking island
Last week Governor Palin set herself apart from every other Republican and Democratic governor in the nation. It's a distinction I'd rather not have - as an Alaskan, or as an American who believes in President Obama's goal of reducing America's dependence on foreign energy.Last week Governor Palin became the first governor in the nation to refuse to accept energy funds the president offered as part of his economic stimulus package. The governor vetoed the Alaska Legislature's acceptance of $28 million the president and Congress have offered Alaska to create a renewable energy and energy savings plan. All we had to do, to accept the funds - funds every other state is working to try to keep - was commit to do the rational. We just had to certify Alaska would make a good faith effort to adopt rational energy efficiency standards (the IEEC), and begin 90% compliance with it by 2017.
Rachel Carson, environmentalism's answer to Pol Pot
Yesterday would have been her 102nd birthday and I'm sorry I missed it, but my sharp-eyed fellow-traveller David Hinz at The Minority Report celebrated with a lively dance on the old fraud's grave. He doesn't mince his words: Rachel Carson - poster girl of the international eco movement - was a "mass murderer" to rival Stalin and Pol Pot.
Not Just Present at Work, but Presentable
With the hottest months of the year looming, concerns about personal hygiene on the bike are heightened.In response, cyclists head to nearby gym locker rooms, wipe themselves down with paper towels, or simply tell themselves that they would get just as sweaty on the subway. (A number of people who were interviewed for this article seemed convinced that air-conditioning was not a standard feature of subway cars.) The luckiest ones have showers at their places of employment. Others rely on sink showers or showers-in-bottles, and a select few head to a friendly bike messengers’ service in Midtown that offers them a place to bathe and stow their bicycles out of a spirit of camaraderie.
Overcoming the stigma of ‘toilet-to-tap’ water
From water officials to academics, and private business experts, all agree that the reuse of water for drinking is safe, affordable and necessary. But what about the yuk factor?
IEA output forecasts are 'outside reality': peak oil proponent
Geneva (Platts) - In a direct shot at the most widely followed estimates of future oil flows, a leading peak oil proponent said the International Energy Agency's supply projections are significantly inaccurate.In the keynote address to the Platts "New Challenges for Crude Oil" conference in Geneva, Swedish physics professor Kjell Aleklett said his research team's analysis differs significantly from the IEA's.
The reason for the different conclusions is narrow but significant: a large difference in estimating the rate of depletion of both fields that are to be developed, and fields that have yet to be discovered but will be by 2030. There are other factors widening the gap between the two, but it is this difference in approach that provides most of the gap.
...The gap between his work and that of the IEA is huge. IEA projections of liquids supply puts total output at 101.5 million b/d by 2030. Aleklett's research sees it at a little more than 75 million b/d.
China Is Said to Plan Strict Gas Mileage Rules
HONG KONG — Worried about heavy reliance on imported oil, Chinese officials have drafted automotive fuel economy standards that are even more stringent than those outlined by President Obama last week, Chinese experts with a detailed knowledge of the plans said on Wednesday.The new plan would require automakers in China to improve fuel economy by an additional 18 percent by 2015, said An Feng, a leading architect of China’s existing fuel economy regulations who is now the president of the Innovation Center for Energy and Transportation, a nonprofit group in Beijing.
Oil to Cost $110 by 2015 on Global Rebound, U.S. Says
(Bloomberg) -- Oil prices will return to $110 a barrel by 2015 as a rebound in economic growth worldwide boosts consumption, the U.S. Energy Department said.Prices, which rose to a six-month high of $62.45 yesterday in New York Mercantile Exchange trading, will continue climbing past 2015 to $130 by 2030, as India, China and other developing nations use more oil, the Energy Information Administration said today in its annual International Energy Outlook report.
OPEC leaves production status quo
VIENNA–OPEC has decided to keep its production targets unchanged, oil ministers said Thursday at a meeting in Vienna.The 12-country oil cartel appears to be counting on a recovering world economy to lift crude prices without their having to cut back output.
OPEC Sec Gen says U.S. oil demand picking up
VIENNA (Reuters) - OPEC Secretary-General Abdullah al-Badri said on Thursday demand had started to pick up in the United States, the world's largest energy consumer."At this time, we are seeing the United States picking up. But above all, which is the most important, we are seeing demand in China and India and Asia as a whole," Badri told Reuters Financial Television.
Exxon Mobil CEO tells shareholders that fossil fuels have long future
In comments at the meeting and a news conference afterward, Tillerson said U.S. gasoline consumption has probably peaked and will slowly decline as a result of increased fuel economy and a growing reliance on low-sulfur diesel fuel. But he said the world isn’t anywhere close to reaching "peak oil," the point at which oil production will crest and then begin an irreversible decline as a result of dwindling petroleum deposits. A full-scale transition from fossil fuels could be "100 years away," he said.
Slovakia's economy hammered by gas cutoff, auto collapse; officials await rebound
The country — which made rapid progress in the past several years by joining the euro currency and attracting coveted auto industry investment in new factories — showed growth of 2.5 percent in the last quarter of 2008. But serious trouble set in with a Russian gas cutoff that slashed deliveries to factories.Then, Slovakia was hit by the collapse of auto production because autos account for fully 15 percent of economic output. Industrial production overall fell 22.9 percent, auto output fell by 40.9 percent. Slovakia's major trading partner, Germany, slid into a deep recession.
Russia pursues market share as OPEC flirtation ends
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia is no longer a welcome guest of OPEC after boosting its production to levels far above those pumped by the group's biggest exporter, Saudi Arabia, and snatching away market share.After flirting with OPEC when a barrel of oil cost less than $40, Moscow has once more set its course on raising production to support an economy entering its first recession in a decade, leaving OPEC to shoulder the burden of record output cuts.
Inquiry Into Oil Company May Hurt Brazil’s Fiscal Plan
RIO DE JANEIRO — Brazil’s national oil company, Petrobras, has come under scrutiny in an investigation that threatens to complicate government efforts to wring more revenue from the deepwater oil fields that are expected to transform the country into a global energy power.The Senate voted last week to investigate whether Petrobras had avoided tax payments and awarded illegal contracts, among other issues. The vote was sealed by senators who oppose President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s Workers Party, setting up an inquiry that is likely to drag on for months.
Brazil find may need oil at US$60 to work: group: Petrobras says US$45
Petrobras may need benchmark oil prices near US$60 a barrel to profitably tap Brazil's massive subsalt offshore finds, Cambridge Energy Research Associates said."We've evaluated the economics and believe that [Brazil's subsalt oil] can be developed with WTI or Brent at US$60," said Enrique Sira, CERA's director for Latin America and co-author of an upcoming report on Brazil's subsalt oil. "If all goes well, Petrobras and partners could reach a significant production level after 2019."
Gazprom to boost 2009 investment in gas pipeline from Sakhalin
Moscow (Platts) - Russian gas giant Gazprom has decided to increase spending on the construction of a local gas pipeline in the Russian Far East to Rb50 billion ($1.6 billion) this year, a senior executive said Thursday.
Iraq starts oil exports from Kurdistan
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq started exporting oil from its largely autonomous Kurdistan region for the first time on Wednesday, Iraq's Oil Ministry said, in an apparent breakthrough after years of deadlock over disputed Kurdish oil contracts.
Raymond J. Learsy: OPEC Meets Pumping Billows Of Hot Air While Curtailing Production Of Oil
There they are again. The good nabobs of Opec going to Vienna to munch their strudel while exuding billows of lamentations about the urgency to push prices to the $75-80/bbl level before they can order a second course.
Chu rules out higher petrol tax
Reducing America’s reliance on oil by raising petrol prices to European levels through increased taxes or regulation is not politically feasible, says Steven Chu, US secretary of energy.The admission comes as Congress considers a cap- and-trade system that opponents say will substantially increase petrol prices just as oil prices soar to their highest level in six months.
Land flattened at plot earmarked for garden
DERELICT garages have been demolished at a site in Harborough which residents want to turn into a community allotment....The Transition Town Harborough environmental group wants to stop the council building homes on the site and instead revive the orchard into a community garden and farming area.
Key senator calls for 100 new reactors in 20 years
OAK RIDGE, Tenn. — Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander called Wednesday for doubling the number of nuclear reactors nationwide, a potentially $700 billion proposal that calls for building 100 more over 20 years.
Colombian Ethanol Output To Surge In 2009
LONDON - Colombian ethanol output is expected to more than double to 2.42 million liters a day by the end of 2009 as new projects come onstream, Agriculture Minister Andres Fernandez Acosta said on Wednesday.
Somalia: Seeking Alternatives to Charcoal in Somaliland
Hargeisa — Insufficient cheaper alternatives and a large former refugee population are fuelling tree-felling and dependence on charcoal in the self-declared republic of Somaliland, adversely affecting the environment, say analysts.Most urban households use charcoal for everyday cooking. "We use a sack of charcoal every four days because our family is large," said Zahra Omar, a mother of 12, in the capital, Hargeisa.
Obama seeks growth in biofuels beyond ethanol
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama said on Wednesday he wants to see new types of biofuels commercialized as quickly as possible, but the corn-based ethanol industry needs to remain viable in the meantime."My administration is committed to moving as quickly as possible to commercialize an array of emerging cellulosic technologies so that tomorrow's biofuels will be produced from sustainable biomass feedstocks and waste materials rather than corn," Obama wrote in a letter to a group of farm-state governors.
Report: Carbon pollution to grow by 40 percent
WASHINGTON - The amount of heat-trapping carbon dioxide seeping into the atmosphere will increase by nearly 40 percent worldwide by 2030 if ways are not found to require mandatory emission reductions, a U.S. government report said Wednesday.The Energy Information Administration said world energy consumption is expected to grow by 44 percent over the next two decades as the global economy recovers and continues to expand. The biggest increases in energy use will come from economically developing countries such as China and India.
Study: Michigan mammals migrating north
TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. (AP) — Commonplace rodents such as opossums and white-footed mice are migrating rapidly northward in Michigan, suggesting climate change is taking hold in the upper Great Lakes region, says a newly released scientific report.The growing abundance of rodent types that historically lived farther south, coupled with a decline of others long found north of the 45th parallel, has accelerated rapidly since the 1970s, say researchers led by biologist Philip Myers, of the University of Michigan.
US aviation CO2 emissions standards 'inevitably' coming
National Resources Defense Council International Climate Policy Director Jake Schmidt said the "writing is on the wall" regarding carbon dioxide emissions standards for US airlines.Speaking yesterday in Washington at the Eco-Aviation conference presented by ATW and Leeham Co., he said that "no source of emissions can be left unchecked. . .Emissions controls are coming. Within the US, aviation will be covered in some form or another. Inevitably it's coming."
Rail industry urges shorter trains off-peak to cut carbon emissions
The rail industry is urging the government to run shorter trains in order to meet Britain's climate change obligations. Removing carriages outside rush hour would conserve energy and reinforce rail's reputation as one of the greenest modes of transport, says an industry manifesto published today.
Scientists proclaim climate change is natural
As the Rudd government geared up its push for a CO2 cap-and-trade emissions trading scheme (ETS), which would annihilate what’s left of Australia’s collapsing physical economy, a public symposium last Sunday heard evidence from several leading Australian scientists that climate change is a natural phenomenon.The symposium, ignored by the lying mainstream media, was held at Monash University and convened by Emeritus Professor Lance Endersbee. Several scientists identified hard evidence that severe cooling is the biggest climate challenge that we face—and its cause is entirely natural.
Perestroika and permafrost: Moscow's new interest in climate change
A new climate 'doctrine' for the first time officially recognises severe risks of global warming and calls for immediate action.
The project represented a Clinton-foundation approach to reduce the carbon footprint of large buildings across the world: building owners obtain financing from banks to renovate their properties by dedicating the savings from lower utility bills to repay the loans. Energy-services companies guarantee reductions in energy consumption to achieve those savings or provide the difference if they fall short. “We’ll never conquer climate change,” Clinton told the crowd on the 80th floor, “until we prove it’s good business to do so.”
Energy Secretary's White-Paint Proposal Puzzles Climate-Change Experts
Energy Secretary Steven Chu stunned the audience at a London scientific conference Tuesday with a radical but simple proposal to combat global warming: Paint all the roofs of all the buildings in the world white.
Japan Trade Minister Says Coal Plant Should Slash C02
(Bloomberg) -- Japan’s trade ministry told investors seeking permission to build a coal-fired power plant that they must take steps to slash carbon emissions, rebuffing the environment minister’s proposal that the project be rejected.
China Vows to Support Plan to Fight Climate Change, Kerry Says
(Bloomberg) -- China, the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases, said it will play a “positive and constructive” role to help the world fight climate change, according to U.S. Senator John Kerry.Chinese Vice Premier Li Keqiang recognizes the need for his country to address the issue urgently, Kerry said today at the end of his visit to the country. The two governments will start scientific research into clean energy, while the U.S. will transfer technology to China with sufficient protection for intellectual property rights, the U.S. senator said.
Pelosi appeals for China's help on climate change
BEIJING – U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged Beijing on Thursday to cooperate on climate change, calling a safe environment a basic human right.
Sea’s Rise May Prove the Greater in Northeast
In the debate over global warming, one thing is clear: as the planet gets warmer, sea levels will rise. But how much, where and how soon? Those questions are notoriously hard to answer.Scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, in Boulder, Colo., are now adding to the complexity with a new prediction. If the melting of Greenland’s ice sheets continues to accelerate, they say, sea levels will rise even more in the northeastern United States and Maritime Canada than in other areas around the world.
Study cites 'slow-motion' threat from permafrost
The study, published in Thursday's journal Nature, looked at thawing parts of Alaska and found that greenhouse gas releases initially are sucked up by new plants as the Arctic gets warmer and greener. But that helpful effect doesn't last.Eventually, between 15 and 50 years, those plants “can't keep up” and get overwhelmed, said study lead author Ted Schuur, a University of Florida ecologist.
At that point, a billion tons of carbon a year can be released into an atmosphere that is already warming because of carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, cars, and other industrial activities, Schuur said. That would contribute the same amount to global warming as the deforestation of the tropics, he said.
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
CNBC in the US this morning (at around 9:15am US EST) ran an interview with Saudi oil minister Naimi and he took major offense to OPEC being called a "cartel". He said it is an "organization" and not a cartel.
[insert clip here of Mafia lawyer denying the Mafia exists]
Re: Chu rules out higher petrol tax
If our options are limited to what is "politically feasible", there is no hope for change. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Chu used to be a scientist; now he's a politician.
PT in PA
Clearly European level gas taxes are not politically feasible. But, what level is feasible? Even a level of taxation that fully funds road repair, and at least partially funds the military compoent would send a strong price signal. I agree, that he has to act like a politician, and stick to what can be done within our very flawed system. Pick the lowest hanging fruit first, then hope the impression of progress can be harnessed to generate enough enthusiasm to go after the next layer.
"I agree, that he has to act like a politician, and stick to what can be done within our very flawed system. "
No, sorry, he does not have to act like a member of our criminal government.He needs to have a backbone and address the very serious issues that face us.
Far too many, even here, tolerate this spineless attitude toward what is coming. Get some B@LL$ Chu, or go home......
From the NY Times article, “We’ll never conquer climate change,” Clinton told the crowd on the 80th floor, “until we prove it’s good business to do so.”
If we run this through a standard media filter, the translation is, "We'll never conquer climate change, because it's good business to not do so."
Once a sleaze, always a sleaze. And I voted for him...twice! D'oh!!!
Let's see... Clinton acknowledges the selfish nature of businesses and elected government officials, and you jump to that? You two are even more cynical than I am.
The sad thing is, he's right. At least, until the point where the number of people on the planet that understands this is like a massive, time release asteroid hitting the planet reaches a critical mass. Then, and perhaps only then, will the profit motive not dominate.
Cheers
I didn't mean it as a comment on Clinton; rather, the "selfish nature of businesses and elected government officials" and all the rest of us. He's right.
to me, it is sleazy to project yourself as a 'world leader', proclaim to understand the catastrophe we're facing, then be so cowardly as to avoid calling for any action by anyone that demands sacrifice at the altar of profit. anyone with a brain cell knows that by the time it becomes profitable to change this course, it will far too late. so essentially he's selling us all out for preservation of short term profit, no?
No, I think he is quite literally acknowledging the reality. Let me ask you: how many people in your nation will step outside tomorrow and shut down their town, city, county, state and nation with a mass protest till they get some significant change?
Until you can answer, "At least a third. Nationwide protests will begin on XX/XX/XX and continue till we achieve x, y, z, q, f, a and w," you're just pissing in the wind.
Cheers
"But we were not talking about seeming coincidences, but rather its more-or-less polar opposite, which is how America is now the world’s largest Banana Republic dirtbag of a country with a delusional citizenry wanting a commie-think free lunch for everybody, a corrupt Congress promising to give it to them, a laughably incompetent Federal Reserve following completely discredited neo-Keynesian econometric stupidities as the pretext for supplying the banks with the staggering loads of money and credit to finance it all, and a corrupt, politicized Supreme Court that will, and often does, approve any injustice, regardless of its Constitutionality, if it has a “higher moral purpose” or even meets with popular or foreign approval."
http://dailyreckoning.com/china-offers-the-imf-an-indecent-proposal/
The usual diatribe from this e-rag, but this caught my eye:
I can only find this:
and this is the only reference to gold:
but that is referring to a no-no for a state.
I guess the US Constitution can be freely edited to suit.
JB
Coinage act 1792
http://numismaticblog.com/?page_id=169
DOLLARS OR UNITS–each to be of the value of a Spanish milled dollar as the same is now current, and to contain three hundred and seventy-one grains and four sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred and sixteen grains of standard silver.
(For extra legal fun - go into the minting business like http://www.opencurrency.com/ and stamp out 371.25 silver grains pieces)
One man's act is another man's constitution.
This commentary is a tad more interesting:
http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/beatsme.html
President Richard M. Nixon had growing war debts from the Vietnam conflict as no war on N. Vietnam had been officially declared, and the public was burdened with numerous taxes and national debt, thus Nixon took the U.S. off the gold standard. The amount of currency in circulation since then has been negotiable.
Gold is not the answer either. At times gold bubbles have burst leaving gold hoarders wiped out. The earth is filled with shafts, tunnels, and pits where there was once gold. Some mine investors paid dearly to mine the yellow metal, only to find the expenses were higher than the returns and as the corporate officers cleaned out their desks richer than ever before, the investor was left with the empty shaft.
Gold is not the answer either.
No. But it can't be 'created out of thin air' like the fiat money can.
Money has to be a "store" of value. Hence one of the "better" idea - money being Watts - is hard to do due to the lack of storage of a Watt of electrical power. But it would have people think Is that Brittney Spears single worth lighting or heating up my food? The person who can figure out a way to "store" electromotive force will be rich beyond the dreams of averice.
Has anyone heard of the tax case where the guy was paying in gold eagles and not reporting it, because the actual face value of the eagles was below the reportable level to IRS? In at least one case I have heard of the jury found for the defendants deciding that the government could not arbitrarily decide that money was worth more than it's face value and that in the eyes of the law the employees had made less than the amount that needed to be reported to IRS.
Employer's gold, silver payroll standard may bring hard time
I don't think he's going to get away with it. The IRS has successfully prosecuted barterers, and I don't see how this is different.
The IRS is a sham, and legality has nothing to do with it. The guy isn't going to get away with it because people in power tend to think might makes right.
IIRC, Thomas Jefferson suggested armed revolution against the government every 20 years. If we'd had that, we'd have no IRS.
it's disserent because the gold eagle is in fact legal tender, and the law does not regognize any differance between it and federal reserve notes, while barter in practice (and it would be barter if it were just bullion) it is in law a legal money transaction.
This makes sense if the quoted 1985(?) law is still in force. It would just be one of hundreds of currencies with value not tied directly to paper dollars. Seems to me the employees would only be liable for tax on the intrinsic value if they sold them for more than face value or used them in commerce for more than face value.
Based on the limited info available, I'd acquit.
Cheers
What if the said employee takes the $50 coin and buys a $800 set of tires? Can the retailer report it as a loss? My dad was IRS for many years and thinks the government will try to stack the juries. He also thinks this is big problems for the government down the road.
So who would be the best lawyer for the defendant ?
My take would be 1. the employee is now liable for taxes on $750 income/bartering tax and 2. the businessman sold his tires for a price, $800, not $50 dollars. He reports that income as such. If he later uses that same coin to buy $50 worth of goods, he's just an idiot. However, since he reported the sale of $800, he is accepting the value of the gold at market price, and paying taxes on that.
He would be demonstrably lying if he claimed the coin was worth $50 and accepted that as full payment for $800. It's not a loss, it's a dumb lie.
Cheers
What if the said employee takes the $50 coin and buys a $800 set of tires?
I read about this back in '07. The conculsion of the time was the conversion of gold -> FRN's would then mean the FRN "gain" would be taxable and fall to Khan's employees not kahn.
Understand that Kahn is taking a 'tax loss' - he can't deduct the $900 FRN -> $50 gold conversion as an employee expense. The whole effort is a "tweak the government" thing. And God bless the tweakers - People like the Liberty Dollar crew who put themselves between a bullet and a target. About the only way the Lib Dollar ppl could have been more tweaky was to used the 371.25 grains standard. The founders latest tweak - http://www.freemarijuanachurch.org/ where you are to take a toke and think about what you've just done. Or how about the Lakota's - being a soverign nation are growing hemp and running their own silver bank http://www.freelakotabank.com/currency.php (about the only thing a tribe hasn't done is allow those of us with SOME blood quantum to "buy" (spend $$$) our way back into their tribe. Oh what a tweak that would be!)
He also thinks this is big problems for the government down the road.
From the wack-job + interesting links site
http://whatreallyhappened.com/content/threats-judges-prosecutors-soaring-0
If Mike R's observation is correct - your Dad's vision is also met. And lady justice will continue to weep.
My guess is that if the gold eagle face value were too low for income tax then the employer is violating minimum wage laws. They are going to get him one way or the other.
violating minimum wage laws
And that's fine.
Such is not a tax evasion issue.
So the juries last time said "nope" - other than it makes for sensational press - why do they think THIS time they are going to get convictions?
This guy sounds like another Peter Schiff. Everythings gone crazy - buy gold!
Not someone I'd want to be invested in, if I was invested with anybody :).
Yet another guy who talks in generalities about inflation. There are a ton of much better blogs with actual numbers; I would skip this Mogambo Guru.
I compare this guy to Peter Schiff, because he sounds generically like Schiff, who...
Peter Schiff Was Wrong
... if Mike Shedlock is correct... pigeon holed himself into a corner. Like anything: keep your options open. Reading all his "Hahahahahaha!"'s -like he's so smart- while providing only conjecture puts him on my ignore list. There so much information out there, some people should be ignored merely out of time constraints.
I agree that Schiff likely was wrong about decoupling. He seems to still think so. However, at the end of all this, the US may well end up worst off due to having the dollar abandoned and having lost much of its power and influence. There may be some retaliatory policies once the US is seen as a true paper tiger, and they might last decades, even generations, in some cases.
WRT hyperinflation, I think that is too early to call, so my problem with Mish's rant is the use of the past tense. It's fairly foolish of him to base everything on now. Schiff is fairly consistent in using open time lines.
What I don't like about Mish is his arrogance and willingness to attack those who disagree with him, much like Denninger.
Cheers
Leanan;
The Dr. Chu FoxNews article is entirely reasonable to include in drumbeat, but as you did above with the Bloomberg story, I feel it would be useful to mention the news source in parentheses, to help put the story in context. Naturally we'll see the address if we mouse-over the link, but when it's FOX, the very choice of showing that viewpoint is as much the message as the story itself.
Just a thought.
Bob
I'm too lazy. The only time I include the source is if it's in the article, in the part I want to quote. It's easy to copy and paste one or two extra words.
Someone wrote a Firefox extension that shows the source, didn't they?
Last thing in the world I want to do is make your job harder..
You're anything but lazy. I can deal with mousing over the link.
That article is a peach, I have to say.
Is Milloy suggesting that we would be causing a decrease in Solar Activity, or that white rooftops would impede our ability to make Vitamin D? Junk Science, indeed!
As if that weren't enough.
Scientists proclaim climate change is natural
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0905/S00369.htm
Someone run and tell Secretary Chu to paint all the roofs black, hurry!
How does the Onion stay in business these days?
Of course climate change is natural. In the distant past sea level has fluctuated by dozens of feet; the earth has been covered in ice; CO2 has been at multiples of current levels, etc. - and Man had nothing to do with it.
If it occurs, severe cooling is a far greater problem for humanity than severe warming, if it occurs.
The media nearly unanimously agrees that severe warming is likely. A large number of prominent scientists agree that severe warming is likely.
A lesser number of scientists, largely solar scientists, are concerned that severe cooling is likely. The media nearly unanimously agrees that these scientists are quacks. The science community does not.
At the peak of the last ice age sea level was 130 meters below present.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_level
The glaciers are responsible for much of the highly productive agricultural soil around the world. Wind blown deposets (loess) that cover large areas of Europe and the US grain belt were caused by massive dust storms in what was probably an arid climate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loess
You are presenting this as a symmetric situation in terms of decisions, yet I haven't seen any actual argument why this is the case.
If with a better understanding of the climate in 20 years time it's the case that the amount of "overall warming" climate change caused by human release of CO2/CH4/etc is a serious problem, AFAIK we have very little technology for sequestering existing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere; the only option for stopping significant rises is not to emit as much greenhouse gases now.
If with a better understanding of the climate in 20 years time it's the case that solar induced severe cooling serious problem, I don't see any problems in increasing large volumes of greenhouse gases beyond the issue that we might want to use that hydrocarbon fuel for something else. But that's no different from not having the fuel available for something else because we've carried on generating them with business as usual for the next 20 years.
In other words, is there anything that can only be done now in the solar cooling case? If not, then I don't see a problem with concentrating on tackling the currently model-predicted AGW.
http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/arcticice.htm
Several ideas to melt the artic ice cap.
I can't tell whether that's some kind of practical joke or not: maybe 35 years ago climatologists would have measured heat energy of water in kcal, but it seems a bit hinky.
Anyway, the point of my question was more "Supposing declining solar activity is a problem, is there any actions that must be done NOW rather than when it becomes much more obvious from the data?" The longest timescale mentioned on that page is 3 years to melt the antarctic under one scheme. This seems different to the argued case for AGW, where there's a difference between modelled effects of available actions now and available actions later.
The best i can tell, these ideas are serious ideas from the middle period of the soviet union. The scientist were trying to figure out how to make siberia "better". Soviet scientist also wanted to reverse the flow of a river to central asia for more irrigation water.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1961Natur.190S.491.
I don't think the articles from the 50's or 60's are on line
As to done now, other people have proposed building the bering straight dam to increase ice in artic. They key difference between the two is how much water is pumped over the dam, and which way.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bering_Strait
http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/could-a-300-km-dam-save-the-arc...
So for a person who wants to try to "manage" the climate, building of the dam would make sense. I am not recommending any of these actions, i was simply showing that there are things that can be intentionally done to reduce the amount of ice on land and see in the northern hemisphere.
As far as i can tell from reading the web, any geo-engineering project is likely to take several decades.
Also, since the solar cycle remains weak, we should likely have solid data for AGW or global cooling withing a few years. Man keeps pumping out carbon dioxide, and the sun has few sunspots. If the temperatures goes up a lot, it is AGW. If it goes down a lot, it is solar cycles. If it is flat, probably neither is right.
Scientists proclaim climate change is natural
And yet - the CO2 levels in the ocean keep rising.
Where is the reasoned arguments of the CO2 levels *NOT* being a problem?
More to the point, where are the peer-reviewed journal articles proving that "It's All A Hoax"?
I know, the deniers love to say that the entire scientific community has some sort of vast, secret pact to prevent The Truth from getting out. But I have to ask: If you were the publisher of Nature or Science or whatever other serious scientific journal you care to name, and someone came to you with slam-dunk evidence that climate change was not being caused, even in part, by anthropogenic emissions, wouldn't you just love to publish it? It would be a landmark paper that the entire world would quote endlessly for decades, probably centuries, to come.
If the scientific field were as callous and greedy as the deniers would have us believe, then it would leap at the chance to overturn the current paradigm. And guess what? It hasn't happened, and the chances that it will are vanishingly small.
I'm willing to concede that the Sun's output of energy will have a warming/cooling effect. (and may be a factor. Look at the 3 days without air travel back in Sept 2001. Higher highs, lower lows)
And I'm willing to embrace the observation of the political nature/previous efforts of nations/people to profit over what turned out to be bogus - and how "carbon taxes" are like the past efforts. (VS oppertunists who smell the heavy hand of the government and are MORE than willing to step in, line up at the government backed feedlot, and use their influence to make sure the feeding happens AND that they get more feed than others)
But I've not noted any effective rebuttal to the CO2 levels rising in the ocean *NOT* being related to Man's releasing of old carbon to fuel Man's efforts.
I watched some of the video's. They presenters seem to be focused on surface temperature. They are not addressing the effects of carbon dioxide on ocean life.
Exactly - I've YET to see a 'AGW is a hoax because of ....' address the CO2 in the ocean water.
Not even the AGW deniers here.
They don't show up to answer my simple request.
I've looked around a bit for more information about the symposium. It looks to be the usual denialist stuff, here's a bit from the announcement.
Sure, there is variation in the solar cycle and we aren't seeing much in the way of sunspots lately. So, is that why the Arctic sea-ice cycle is showing the yearly decline with an extent much like that in 2007, a year when a record minimum in extent was recorded? Here's looking forward to the end of September, when the minimum will be seen.
And, I wonder whether Bob Carter is still using the wrong batch of satellite data, as he did in his presentation before Congress?
E. Swanson
Actually, NOAA had a bit of a problem with its primary sea-ice satellite and has recently censored its data. Other satellites are showing sea-ice extent below, but very near historic averages. Definitely not a continued decline.
Similarly, the statistics about new, thin ice are misleading. Of course the ice is thin and new, it all melted off two years ago. (More accurately, it was broken off by unusual wind activity and subsequently melted by warmer air temperatures.) This is a cause for concern, just as it was in 2007, but ice has been recovering since.
Actually, a recent arial radar survey conducted by a German team has shown much thicker artic ice than expected, in many cases over 4 meters thick.
Yes, there have been problems with the satellite data. However, the NSIDC is still reporting sea-ice extent based on a 15% concentration cutoff and the data shows extent approaching that of 2007 at this time of year. Of course, there is year-to-year variation and the most important data isn't that from one day, but the minimum value as it occurs sometime in September or October. That's because the minimum extent defines the maximum amount of multi-year sea-ice, that is, sea-ice which has survived the melt season. All the increase in extent in the subsequent winter freeze becomes first year ice, which tends to be thinner and thus tends to melt faster the next summer.
As for your mention of data from a German team, I'm not aware of it. There was a team which trekked over the sea-ice this spring in an attempt to reach the North Pole. They stopped every so often and made measurements of thickness, but they were forced to abandon the effort before they reached the North Pole as the sea-ice was melting too fast for them to continue, as I recall. The brief report I saw indicated the sea-ice measurements were thinner than expected...
E. Swanson
See the article at:
www.radiobremen.de%2Fwissen%2Fnachrichten%2Fwissenawipolararktis100.html
I think that Google will automatically translate this for you if your German is a little rusty.
This survey covered much more territory than the Catlin survey, which was a fiasco. I am pretty sure there wasn't too much melting going on that early in the spring - especially given their on-line reports of frost-bite, hypothermia, and blizzard conditions. Their problem was more that they were freezing to death and ice drift was nearly erasing their progress.
I agree that thinner ice is problematic.
Your link does not work.
Don't know why the link pasted funny last time.
http://www.radiobremen.de/wissen/nachrichten/wissenawipolararktis100.html
You can also google "radio bremen eisdicken" and get the same.
Bull.
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
Your piles of bull are huge:
1. That the extent on any given day is important, when it is not.
2. That the extents other than at the minimum and maximum averages are all that important for determining trends.
3. That extent is currently "very near" historical averages when it is, in fact, closer to the lowest minimum yet than to the long-term baseline average.
4. That thickness stats are "misleading." How the fact can a fact be misleading? Thickness of the ice is of vast importance as thinner ice is far more vulnerable.
5. There is always thick ice. This is irrelevant without info on the extent of it and its location. I.e., even if there is thick ice (and, again, there always is - not the issue), if it goes floating into the North Atlantic, it's meaningless.
6.
AND warmer water temperatures. Significant melt was found to be occurring bottom-up. Lies of omission are no better than outright lies. And, DUH!, warmer air temps? Isn't that the whole flippin' point? Warming?
7.
You have no clue what "recovering" means, apparently. You mean there was natural variation that continues to pull the long term trend downward? Ah, that's what I thought you meant.
That's a lot of bull crap for one short post. Not a single thing you said was fully truthful. BTW, where are your links?
Everything I have stated here was linked ad nauseum last fall and winter.
Do you really want to declare that min and max are all that matters, that trajectory is irrelevant?
What happened to the polite CCPO?
First, there was nothing impolite in my post. Your points are bull. It is not impolite to say so.
In fact, not quite. In practice, yes, because we are always, when discussing climate, discussing long-term trends. Thus, minimums and maximums.
The system is extremely complex with a huge amount of noise. Juxtaposing '07 and '08 minimums is instructive in this regard.
'07: lots of storms and unusual wind patterns blowing large amounts of ice out of the Arctic Ocean, as well as bringing warm water and wind into the Arctic.
Result: lowest minimum in satellite record.
'08: Normal conditions all around.
Result: second-lowest minimum in the satellite record, which was very close to '07.
IMO, this illustrates two things. First, variability is huge. Second, the effects of insolation on Arctic Amplification are significant over time. I.e, water temps are rising causing bottom melt.
Also, there was what the denialists like to inappropriately call a "rebound" of winter ice following '07, yet '08 was another near-record ice melt.
WRT trajectory, the speed of melt/ice growth in any given period of the year is highly variable. In '08 the losses in June were way out of the norm. The minimum was lower, but not a new low.
This past fall the ice built up far faster than usual. Why? Because of the high heat content of the ocean water. I.e., it was a result of greater heating, not evidence of cooling as the idiot denialists tried to claim. The result was not a new record in sea ice this winter. In fact, the maximum was closer to '07 than the base line.
If this doesn't clear this issue up for you, nothing will.
Cheers
Looking at you link, it appears that this year sea ice has been near the long-term average and near the minimum at various times. However, this year has been continuously above the 2007 low year, so, it does appear to be recovering from the lows.
One or two years is not long enough to decide that there is "recovery." The long term trends are clear--less ice coverage and less long term ice. Minimizing the importance of this earth-changing event is beyond contemptible.
Multi-year ice in the Arctic had been above 40% of the total before the '80s. It went to about 20% in '06 and is now below 10%.
[url=http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20090406_Figure5.png]link[/url]
I have seen no data that suggests that there has been a significant recovery in multi year ice. We are indeed skating on thin ice. If the Arctic goes ice free, no one knows what exact effect it will have on the climate of the Northern Hemisphere. But it will likely be profound and disruptive. With so little thick ice, this event could happen any year now.
It will almost certainly commit us to runaway global warming, as the tundra thaws yet faster and as methane hydrates, warmed by the super heated summer waters, bubble up in ever greater quantities...
Deleted
Later entries covered my question
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.wit...
The global see ice is above the long-term average. The global amount of ice seems to me to be more important than the arctic alone.
Only if you don't understand Arctic Amplification. But that would be pretty unbelievable, to post on this topic and not understand AA...
So, are you saying that the amount of sea ice is below, not above the long-term average? I am talking about actual data, not models. Do you have a source for your data?
I have very clearly discussed Arctic sea ice. Your attempt to lump Arctic and Antarctic has already been dispensed with. Pretending otherwise makes you a less-than-honest participant here.
Your intentional misrepresenting of what is said in clear English is dishonest. If you wish to have a discussion, have one. If you wish to be child, I'm sure you can find a playground somewhere.
FACT: Arctic Amplification is real.
FACT: Arctic trends are **currently** more important to assessing climate change than Antarctic trends. Models, science and logic all tell us melting will occur in the Arctic before the Antarctic. Don't pretend Black-Dog didn't answer your silly inquiry.
FACT: Trend trumps short term data. You are playing at the pretense the opposite is true. That is, you are engaging in just another form of lie.
See if you can figure out from this chart (any chart of virtually any weather and/or climate phenomenon would do **hint** **hint**) why your comments about rebound is... not evidence of high intelligence: http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/n_plot_hires.png
FACT: you know enough to ask the questions you do and attempt to frame the discussion from a denialist stance, which means your bullshit is intentional. We thus can conclude you have no interest in a rational, objective, intelligent discussion.
That is, you are a denialist troll. The denialist part I suppose we must live with, but not the trolling. Hopefully, you will be banned soon if you continue to attempt to distort the issues.
Cheers
I advocate EcoNuremberg.
I would much prefer that you be banned for your obnoxious and insulting behaviour.
If you can't remain polite, don't bother posting. I for one will certainly not bother reading your posts anymore.
If you really think a post is ban-worthy, use the flag button. That's what it's for. If enough people agree, the obnoxious post will go away.
I was just going to post the same comment as Leanan.
Further:
* You might ponder why Shunyata got a different manner of response.
* That some people find lies acceptable, but calling lies a lie not acceptable, my non-PC brain doesn't get. How can anything be more rude or more disrespectful than to mislead with malice aforethought? And why do you think it's OK to do so?
Cheers
You know, I look at that graph, and I see a clear annual cycle with 2006-2007 being the only years where the long term, untrended average is not exceeded. 2008 was a low year for peak global, exceeding the average but not by as much as was common in the 70's and 80's.
This year it appears that the seasonal maximum is lower than 2008. The minimum hasn't been met yet. Not promising.
How far back can you make that graph go? It would be more illuminating if it could be extended back to a previous warm period. As it sits, it barely covers 2 PDO's.
The fact is that the Arctic and the Antarctic are different beasts as far as climate is concerned. The Arctic is a high latitude ocean surrounded by land, while the Antarctic is a high latitude land area covered with ice which is surrounded by a warmer ocean. As a result, the sea-ice cycles are different in that almost all the Antarctic sea-ice melts every year, whereas over the Arctic Ocean, there has been a historical situation where much of the sea-ice remains at the end of the melt season. Also, the Antarctic is being impacted by the depletion of ozone in the colder stratosphere above the continent, which has been implicated with cooling at the surface.
I think the Arctic is the more important indicator of AGW and the data you present lumps both Arctic and Antarctic together. Look at the anomaly for the Arctic to get a feeling for what's happening there.
E. Swanson
If say water reflects 10% of solar radiation, and ice reflects 90% of solar radiation; the absolute amount of see ice would seem to be a critical factor in the global temperature.
Also, do you have a link showing why arctic is more important than antarctic ice?
The difference is actually 20/80. Still, your basic statement is correct, but only in isolation. But you know this, so I'm wasting my breath: Black_dog and I have answered this already. The geology/topography/climate/weather systems are different and react differently. Arctic Amplification.
Again, we said everything already.
This is the equivalent question if asked about oil:
Do you have a link showing decline is real?
Here's a question for you: Do you wish to be taken seriously?
The larger problem is what happens if the Arctic sea-ice actually does begin to completely disappear at the end of the summer melt season. That would open the Fram Strait to the flow of more of the surface waters from the Arctic Ocean into the Nordic Seas, which would then cap the water in the Nordic seas with lower salinity water than has historically been seen. In addition, thinner ice during winter moves thru the Fram Strait much more easily, which also adds fresh water to the surface of the Nordic Seas. This cap of low salinity water would be less dense and therefore less likely to sink as part of the so-called Thermohaline Circulation (THC), which is said to be the main cause of the warmer winters in northern Europe.
This process has been widely discussed, but poorly described by various commentators in the popular media. The comment usually goes something like "Global Warming will shut off the Gulf Stream", a claim which is quite wrong. The Gulf Stream is what the oceanographers call a Western Boundary Current and is caused by the prevailing trade winds which push the waters of the oceans against the continents and thence toward higher latitudes. Thus, the Gulf Stream would be expected to continue to flow, however, without the THC, the path taken by the Gulf Stream would likely change, taking a more southerly route and thus moving less heat to higher latitudes. Many model experiments have exhibited a weakening of the THC, the exact timing and strength of the changes being different in each experiment. The models I've tried to understand do not represent these processes very well, especially the localized THC sinking process, so things could actually be worse, i.e., happening faster, than the models suggest. That's why the apparent rapid loss of Arctic sea-ice is of so much concern...
E. Swanson
If you say that, I say that total sea ice extent becomes totally irrelevant because the sun is only shining on one pole.
I'm waiting for the article entitled: "Scientists Proclaim Humanity is Unnatural". That's the implication here and everywhere in the debate on climate change. Implication, hell, it's a fundamental conclusion of the fundamental assumption that we are somehow separate from the natural world and not an integral part of it.
And the immediate dangers from climate change won't come from warming or cooling. They'll come from shifts in local weather patterns causing shifts in the the local ecology, which will reduce crop yields and increase the spread of disease and opportunistic pests. They'll come from increased variability in the weather, which results in increased physical and structural stress, which results in increased damage to our infrastructure, roads mainly.
Maybe The Onion can do this article, if they haven't already, "Scientists Run Screaming, Hide Under Bed".
Quite the contrary. The implication is that climate change, especially anthropogenic climate change, affects the very systems upon which all life, including our own, depend for survival. It is the irrational dogmas, usually of religious persuasion that have allowed most of humanity to wallow in the dangerous delusion that we are at the pinnacle of all nature and therefore have dominion over it without having to take into consideration the consequences of the pressures our existence puts on such systems.
The science is telling us precisely that we are neither separate from natural systems, nor are we any longer in benign equilibrium with these systems upon which our survival depends. It is very clearly telling us that we have indeed passed into an unsustainable state, incompatible with our survival. Should we continue on our current course of self indulgent narcissism, we will probably find out in a very hard way, how much a part of the natural world we are by reverting to the proverbial dust.
This is a bit old, but whenever fission power comes up for debate and the topic goes to Chernobyl, someone says 'things are fine there'
http://www.mosnews.com/world/2009/03/18/chernobyl/
And one that is new via the 25 most censored stories:
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/category/y-2009/
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/14-mainstreaming-nuc...
And Shell is going to trial over human rights abuses
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htF5XElMyGI&feature=player_embedded
For those who might be worried about some of the things around you being radioactive, I would recommend you purchase a NukAlert device to keep with you.
Who knows, you might even manage to detect some terrorist trying to transport something really dangerous?
http://www.nukalert.com/
Tuesday..
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=20090526...
'The company said the leak had been minor, but that six people working there were exposed to the radiation.'
Today..
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7015303617
'..With the discovery, the AECL said the NRU reactor will remain close for at least three months.
The long period of repair is expected to impact the medical community since the nuclear facility produces medical isotopes and exports the bulk of its isotopes overseas.
The heavy water leak was pinpointed at the base of the reactor vessel in a spot where there is corrosion on the outside wall of the vessel. The AECL have completed using remote cameras which inspected the full circumference of the external wall on the base of the reactor vessel. The inspection showed there are additional corrosion points on the vessel's outer wall.'
Even while 'Rust never sleeps' .. Radioactive storage seems to put rust into ADHD mode.
Yep, Chernobyl was bad. Good thing nobody makes reactors like that anymore (including the Russians).
Yep, radioactive releases happen. I notice the reports don't mention the release size or the amount of radiation exposure. Could have been nasty, could have been harmless levels, but since it's radioactive it's news either way.
Should I post the past months (or past 25 years since we've got the Big C in the house) fossil fuel related spills, accidents, and fatalities? Just for completeness, you understand...
Bringing up Chernobyl is your response? We've got leaks in France, Scotland, Japan, the US, Argentina, Canada etc etc.. these are located on waterways. Guess what, it's news. Keep shrugging your shoulders. The reactors get leaks, the waste storage gets leaks, and it's all additive.
Comparing it to Petrol leaks would be 'complete' if I were somehow advocating for FF over Nuclear, which I clearly do not. These systems are built from refined materials which as they age are showing that 'Plumbing Systems Leak', just like Toilets, just like Filling Stations.. they are leaking Excessively Toxic Radioactives. The leaks from Chemical plants, refineries and old lawn-mowers are in ADDITION to these Mutagens, so putting them 'on the other hand' in your argument to somehow make Nuclear Waste an 'Oh well' issue is baffling.
Don't build it if you can't clean up after yourself.
I've got leaks in my kitchen too. It doesn't mean its hazardous to go in my kitchen. Its all about relative risk. See, when the Germans instituted their nuclear phaseout they found themselves in the unusual situation of needing to build coal power plants to make up the shortfall. I know you aren't overtly advocating FF over nuclear, but thats how it allways plays out.
If you aren't advocating for FF over Nuclear what do you propose that can produce the same levels of energy?
Regardless of cries against supporting BAU, we will produce and use as much energy as we can. If it isn't nuclear+renewables+solar-cycle it will be FF.
And yes, Nuclear waste can be nasty stuff, but it isn't the nastiest or most permanent stuff we produce as a society.
So I say: show the harm. The article above showing the environmental impacts of Chernobyl does that, but is somewhat lacking. I am sure there is a real scientific paper somewhere behind that, and that some anti-nuclear advocate could find a link or reference to it.
Show the human morbidity and mortality, show that it is worse per MW than other sources. This stuff gets tracked, if it is such a big deal find it.
I demonstrated last time this came up that information regarding injuries, illnesses, and deaths from FF handling and processing is readily available.
So I say: show the harm.
Man has not moved passed the "attack other men" phase. Fission plants make for a tempting target in asymmetric warfare - and asymmetric warfare looks like a modern winner as a way to harm the much bigger opponent.
Hell, Man has not moved beyond the 'lie like a MOFO' stage.
Turns out that was not the case at Three Mile Island.
Yet stack monitors were unuseable to to the large amount of radiation at Three Mile Island. In a "open Republic".
Yet cameras showed melting at Three Mile Island. At least in this "open republic" we were eventually told some of what happened.
But hey, lets wait for the "show the harm" phase, not like the the people who want to have the harm actually SHOWN to them will take any responsibility for that harm.
The harm from FF usage is visible, searchable, and readily accessible.
Nuclear power provides 21% of US electric power, a similar percentage worldwide. If we can't handle it, if it is too dangerous to use, there will be indications of it in worldwide health figures. TMI was in the 70's, Chernobyl was in 84, the actual health impacts of these events is quite well tracked and doesn't rise to the level of equivalent FF and chemical plant incidents.
Simply put, if it is so dangerous the harm will be too big to hide, pull it up and show some figures.
So I say: show the harm.
Man has not moved passed the "attack other men" phase. Fission plants make for a tempting target in asymmetric warfare - and asymmetric warfare looks like a modern winner as a way to harm the much bigger opponent.
Hell, Man has not moved beyond the 'lie like a MOFO' stage.
Turns out that was not the case at Three Mile Island.
Yet stack monitors were unuseable to to the large amount of radiation at Three Mile Island. In a "open Republic".
Yet cameras showed melting at Three Mile Island. At least in this "open republic" we were eventually told some of what happened.
But hey, lets wait for the "show the harm" phase, not like the the people who want to have the harm actually SHOWN to them will take any responsibility for that harm.
Actually, Chernobyl has been great for wildlife and the environment, as the humans have moved out and stopped destroying their habitats and disturbing them. If a few individuals of the more radiation-vulnerable species gets cancer or birth defects, that is not really a problem, ecology-wise.
That radioactive scrap is released is no problem if the radioactivity levels are low enough. Sheesh, there is so much hysteria around radioactivity.
Here, give me your Thyroid gland for a second. This is really cool, watch..
That reminds me of White Sands Missile range. When some ecologists got to tour it they were schocked. They had no idea that the native arid environment supported such wildlife. Despite thousands of missile test -and one A-bomb explosion, the ecology was in much better shape than anywhere else in the intermountain west!
jeppen said:
"Actually, Chernobyl has been great for wildlife and the environment"
Wrong again
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#Flora_and_fauna
Also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#Chernobyl_today
4tons of dust could become airborne due to the "probable" collapse of the sarcophagus.
http://en.pripyat.com.ua/2006/12/12/chernobyl-shelter-object-current-sta...
Wow thats great. From the very link you posted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#Flora_and_fauna
Sounds scary but its besides the point: "Actually, Chernobyl has been great for wildlife and the environment"
If we follow the paragraph further that you linked to we get the more complete picture:
The next generation appeared to be normal.[64]
How the study in [65] makes these comaprisons is unclear from the link.
The environment itself and wildlife in the Pripyat region is far more vibrant after the accident than before. This isn't to say that I 3GW Thermal reactor blowing up without a containment dome is good, it most certainly is bad for people in the region. But it certainly has been good for wildlife in the region, as lingering radioactive contamination is far less destructive than the ordinary activities of man on the environment. A more complete exploration of the topic is found in "Wormwood Forest: A Natural History of Chernobyl" by Mary Mycio.
It was great, thank you for noticing.
And thanks also for posting the rest of the quote that I was saving for just this event.
The complete picture spells out very clearly that "Many species of wild animals and birds, which were not seen in the area prior to the disaster, are now plentiful due to the absence of humans.
Not that somehow the accident itself and the resulting radioactive fallout was beneficial to wildlife in the area.
Yet somehow you proceed with the same delusion that jeppen is afflicted with;"it certainly has been good for wildlife in the region, as lingering radioactive contamination is far less destructive than the ordinary activities of man on the environment."
Really now?
A more complete examination of the uptake of radionuclides by plants and animals is found in "The Ecology of the Chernobyl Catastrophe" By Vladimir Kirillovich Savchenko.
Yes, of course. If you doubt this I'm afraid you dont understand how severe the reach of civilization is on an environment.
Radioisotope uptake is only severe on an environment when the energy of the radioisotopes is very high, and these are gone after several months. It means increased mortality for the wildlife but not impared ecological fitness.
This isn't to suggest I prefer Pripyat a wildlife refuge as opposed to a town. I'm only being pedantic. I'd vastly prefer wildlife never had this accidental preserve, as wildlife isn't one of my aesthetic priorities. But suggesting that the Chernobyl disaster was universally bad for wildlife is plainly false.
Actually, Chernobyl has been great for wildlife and the environment,
I understand that the internet is international and some people are not native English speakers. I also know that English is hard for some natives.
You do understand that the article I linked to says your position is not correct? You do understand that here on TOD, if you are making a counterclaim that you should provide actual evidence - in linked form is the normative?
All you've done is say the opposite of the linked article. That's not proof, that's just invoking bizarro-world opposite day.
And, well, such is the level of comics...not debate.
That radioactive scrap is released is no problem if the radioactivity levels are low enough.
And yet the original link says:
Action to prevent does not back your claim.
Hrmmm. Who to "trust" as " knowledgeable" - the DOE or an un-attributed claim by "jeppen".
Summary of Weekly Petroleum Data for the Week Ending May 22, 2009
Looking at This Week in Petroleum, distillate supply continues to be very high. No doubt this is part of the reason diesel prices are below those of gasoline.
Gasoline stocks dropped less last week that in the recent past:
The amount of gasoline consumption this week was surprisingly high. Some of it may be Memorial Day driving. Some of it may be a "glitch" in reporting. The amount shown as product supplied for the one week ended 5/22/09 is 9,538 kbd. The last time one-week consumption was that high was in August 2007. On a four-week average basis, it is below the previous year, however. This year 9,151; last year 9,347, a decrease of 2.1%. On a per capita basis, the decrease would be greater--about 3%, assuming population is growing at about 1% per year.
I've been watching the relationship between gasoline and diesel prices. While stocking levels probably are the direct reason for the recent change in the relative prices I've been wondering if the deeper reason for the shift is a relative reduction in the amount of commercial trucking compared to personal vehicle miles.
I'd believe that! During my trip to the US back in March, I noticed that there seemed to be a lot of used trucks for sale, in addition to the lots full of new trucks. I had my pick of trucks when I went to rent a truck in NC, lots of trucks available and the location where I dropped of the truck in Miami even had a few out front for sale. Then there's something I haven't seen in Miami before, a parking lot full of used rigs, ALL for sale. On previous trips to Miami, before 9/11, when I was thinking of buying a truck, it was always a sellers market. Looks like a really bad time for the trucking business!
Alan from the islands
Housing report was pretty ugly, underneath the sunny New home sales edge up headline.
The original reading was 356,000, I believe, which means if it hadn't been downwardly revised, this would be a drop, not a rise. (Gee, home sales can go up forever. All we have to do is keep downwardly revising the previous month's number. ;-)
And then there's this: one in eight homeowners is behind on payments or already in foreclosure.
It's not just subprime any more:
Still ugly, but it's probably one in eight of those with a mortgage is behind.
For the birds!
Nova Scotia Power and the Nova Scotia Museum of Natural History have turned on their Osprey Cam (this is the third year of operation). Perched high up on a power pole are Ethel and Oscar and soon to be hatched three baby chicks.
See: http://museum.gov.ns.ca/mnh/osprey/index.asp
The Osprey is Nova Scotia's official bird.
Cheers,
Paul
Thanks, Paul.
It's one of my favorite raptors, too. We've got some nesting pairs off of Portland that I've gotten to watch hunting up the Fore River here.
The Telegraph Piece up there has chilled my blood. Anybody have current info on the DDT challenge? (I'm taking my daughter on a Rachel Carson Birdwalk on Saturday, and I sure don't want to be responsible for 50million deaths!)
Bob
Jokuhl, there is plenty of evidence that DDT was causing massive harm to the environment. The Bald Eagle was on the way to extinction and would have been right now had DDT continued to be sprayed for a pesticide. Same for the Osprey and other birds of prey.
DDT also accumulates in mothers milk and can do harm to the offspring. DDT In Mothers Linked To Developmental Delays In Children, UC Berkeley Study Finds
You will find the usual right wing deniers, claiming that DDT does no harm to animals, bird eggs or mothers. That is always the case, there are always deniers. There are deniers of global warming, of peak oil and virtually everything else you can think of.
Have you ever noticed that those of the far right political persuasion and of the fundamentalist religious persuasion have by far more than their fair share of deniers.
Ron P.
my left wing friends deny peak oil and resource scarcity in general. they deny that technology has practical limits, too - they believe that because a lot of sunlight falls on earth, we will never have an energy shortage.
i could keep going, but you get the idea.
left wing, right wing - it's just two sides of the same coin.
Peak oil and limits to growth are still fringe beliefs. Homo sapiens, like all animals, respond to stimuli. They'll believe it en masse when they see it.
Speaking of DDT - My dog is a better person than James Delingpole.
Speaking of dogs, they are some of the most wonderful creatures. Everything about their lives is an adventure. Suppertime! Oh boy, oh boy! Go for a walk! Oh boy, oh boy! Catch the frizbee! Oh boy, oh boy!
Speaking of Peak oil and the TEOTWAWKI! Oh boy, oh boy! Camping!
I used to believe that. But empires have hit limits to growth and collapsed for thousands of years. We've seen it en masse so many times already, that IMO we must have decided not to remember it.
Yes, but you actually have to see it with your own eyes and feel it on your own skin.
It's not enough to read it in a history book or even see it on TV halfway across the globe.
It has to hit you square in the face and take down your entire community, your closest friends and your immediate family. It has to hurt you personally. Only then will most people understand that they need to change.
Very few people make major changes based on anything else and those few are usually the ones that have some chance of thriving when TSHTF.
I would add that even being aware is not necessarily being ready or taking action. I live pretty much as always with a few lifestyle modifications and appropriate possessions. Still, until the sky begins to fall, I have no idea what will happen or what I'll do. I personally believe the transition will be relatively slow; a series of bumps much like the one we've just come through over decades. Kind of "boil-the-frogish." Time for some social changes if there's enough pain.
Nature will ultimately return us to stasis in the very long run.
Cam and Jeanie say thank you.
Cheers,
Paul
You're most welcome Paul,
Looks like Cam and Jeanie might allow you to turn down the thermostat! BTU's anyway you can get them.
Zena says HI back!
Yes, they seem to be far more inclined to believe in fairy tales in general and therefore tend to deny realities that contradict their version of the truth.
See my comment on Rachel Carson below.
"But he said the world isn’t anywhere close to reaching "peak oil," the point at which oil production will crest and then begin an irreversible decline as a result of dwindling petroleum deposits."
Well he would say that, wouldn't he? In fairness to these petro-executives, I suspect many of them are tipetoeing around the issue in public because they are afraid of shareholder lawsuits. They may privately agree with Peak Oil, but to say that out loud would damage share prices and trigger lawsuits from investors who expect stocks to only go up.
Meanwhile, I'm still buying private-equity conventional oil (to live off the royalties and dividends now) and physical gold (for my old age).
Out of curiosity, I'm not sure what "private-equity conventional oil" means-- is that investment in private companies, or some variant of a publicly traded fund/stock? Thx.
Hmm, my oil stock keeps pace almost exactly with the price of crude. Seems to me a rational stockholder ought to be cheering for peak oil.
From Obama and ethanol up top:
"My administration is committed to moving as quickly as possible to commercialize an array of emerging cellulosic technologies so that tomorrow's biofuels will be produced from sustainable biomass feedstocks and waste materials rather than corn," Obama wrote in a letter to a group of farm-state governors.
IMO Obama is no dummy. What is he doing here? He knows for sure that there are no currently operating commercial non corn ethanol plants in the U.S.. He must know that there is no something for nothing in biology and by implication biomass feedstocks. There might be something for nothing in some waste materials.
But there is no something for nothing in corn waste after harvest such as corn cobs and stover. These "wastes" contain nutrients that return to the soil some of what was used in producing the corn crop. If corn cobs are the new biomass as in Poet's pilot plant, additional nutrients and soil texture material are being removed. They are no more sustainable than corn. In fact removing cobs and corn stover make corn less sustainable and therefore cob biomass less sustainable.
Magical switchgrass, the other nirvana biomass, has got to be the same situation. Switchgrass probably does grow like magic when it is not harvested year after year. When it is, the yields will fall as nutrients and soil texture are lost due to repeated harvesting. These nutrients will need to be eventually replaced as with any crop.
Lost in the sustainable biomass argument is the how the stuff will be gathered, stored and transported to the plant and how farmers or whoever will be compensated. For biomass ethanol to work there must be profit in it. If there is and it is high enough to produce large amounts of feedstock, farmers will switch from corn to switchgrass for obvious cost reasons. It seems to me that corn production would then fall thus achieving what is now happening with corn ethanol production.
Obama and his advisers surely know this and hopefully have thought ahead to this possible outcome. What is going on is a "cover story" to quiet corn ethanol critics. He knows corn is a better option for ethanol than biomass since it can also be used for animal and human food. In a pinch such as bad a crop due to weather, a few ethanol plants can be shut down and the "food" supply maintianed. Make non corn biomass profitable to supply feedstock and shutting down the ethanol plants will do little to help the situation.
Corn prices would have to skyrocket to get farmers to switch back to corn again and nothing will have been gained with biomass but to make the situation worse.
g.w. bush sed the the u.s constitution is just a piece of paper (money is just a piece of paper), and any lawyer can tell you that any contract can be renegotiated. i propose to all here at the oil conundrum that we let the polar ice cap melt and start dumping plastic waste there to replace it. isnt there a plastic patch as big as texas in the pacific ocean? well, it's just in the wrong place. we must get organized crime and corrupt governments to dump the stuff where it is needed. let us start a new thread and t(h)rash this proposal out. remember, it's all good! WHO IS WITH ME AND WHO IS AGAINST ME! praise be to zardoz! bioengineering leads to better living through chemistry.
Loonie to reach parity by year-end: TD Securities
http://www.financialpost.com/news-sectors/story.html?id=1635744
http://www.financialpost.com/most-popular/story.html?id=1636497
Looks like this Canadian petrocurrency is getting stronger, eh.
Based on the argument that 1) There is no causal relationship between exposure to DDT and the thinning of eggshells in birds of prey. 2) That 50+ million deaths can be attributed directly to malaria which supposedly could have been prevented had DDT been allowed to be used for mosquito control.
Is it too much to ask that the author of that piece actually research the science behind his assertions. I guess if you don't take into consideration that DDT is metabolized into DDE which has been conclusively shown to have an impact on shell thickness you could indeed say that DDT is not directly responsible.
While DDT is certainly a proven control agent for mosquito populations it doesn't quite follow that 50 million people died as a direct result of its ban and that this can be traced directly to Rachel Carson's book The Silent Spring.
I guess what I really find difficult to wrap my mind around is what the specific agenda might be in this particular case. Equating Rachel Carson with Pol Pot? More specifically if this has any significant impact other that being sensationalist drivel targeted at a relatively small minority of ignorant readers who are unable to master even the most rudimentary search engine skills.
I guess the author must be very handsomely compensated for producing such highly refined yak dung!
Gotta be careful in what stories one chooses.
The climate-denial conference and this one about Rachel Carson and DDT are examples of stories which are not worth consideration. The DDT canard has been a right-wing staple for years - many times refuted, but it keeps coming back.
The purpose of these stories is not to convince people, but to sow confusion and to cause people to waste energy.
Bart
Energy Bulletin
It's good to keep track however, of the anti-environmentalist lobby's current activities by posting links like this one.
I doubt anyone with a TOD account thinks Leanan bought into that vile story.
It's also worth pointing out that she was DEAD in 1964.
It is not her fault if NGOs in the 1970 didn't read her book close enough and banned DDT, and to equate her to Pol Pot is really vile.
The cons get it exactly backwards. Rachel warned that indisciminant use of DDT (like for agriculture) instead of carefully using to control disease vectors would breed resistance ruining it's effectiveness for the later purpose, and lead to the deaths of millions. But, there was money to be made selling it to farmers. So the mosquitos acquired immunity, and an effective weapon against disease was ruined. But hey anything is fair in love and (culture) war. After all Rachel inspired left of center people, she must be evil!
True. Carson was aware of the beneficial effects of DDT. She wanted it used carefully, not banned altogether.
Over at www.autobloggreen.com
Oil prices continue to rise as Saudis target $80 per barrel, could climb from there
Ah, even the guys over at my other favorite blog are drinking somebody's kool-aid!
Alan from the islands
I-boy I always wonder when I see such forecast: what did these same folks forecast oil to be last March back when it was hitting $147/bbl last year. Think they were predicting oil below $40/bbl? Now that would make me take them seriously.
CNN on USGS on Arctic Oil and Gas
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/05/28/arctic.oil.gas.reserves/index...
I hope that 300 billion figure is CNN's mistake and not the EIA's or USGS's.
Joules -- Another worthless piece of filler for public consumption IMO. First, they don't say whether the volumes of oil they offer are inplace or recoverable. They probably meant recoverable but one can't be sure. But if they do mean recoverable reserves then their numbers are even more misleading. The amount of oil recoverable from a reservoir anywhere on the planet is a function of how much is inplace and how much can be recovered with existing technology AT A CERTAIN PRICE. At $30/bbl I doubt there is one bbl of oil recoverable from the Arctic basin. At $200/bbl there may well be 10's of billions of bbls recoverable. Just another of my rants against projections of recoverable oil reserves when a pricing assumption is not included.
Web Video of the Week: Understanding Peak Oil
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_18068.cfm
thanks for posting
Originally known as "A Crude Awakening - The Oil Crash"
=>> a brilliant movie and good starting point for non-aware people
Some local economic observations. I work in a small Maine coastal harbor town. It's been around since the 1600's and has a very busy harbor. Very affluent area, in fact most of the old sea captain houses on the main st are owned by out of staters, I'm thinking it was not only a nice summer house but considered a good investment. The local economy is pretty much geared as support for these folks, lawn care, caretaking, cleaning, etc. You get the picture. Lots of small farmsteads though, locals make cash in the summer and do for themselves in the winter.
Well it now looks more like labor day up here than the start of summer after memorial day. Usually by this time there's a waiting line at the docks to put your boat in, tonite I counted 5 small boats moored. Hugely down. Driving past the boat storage yards they are there but just sitting with for sale signs on them.
The town has a country club and golf course, not surprisingly. Nobody is out on the links at all. The houses that usually have jags, lexus', or hummers parked in the drive are still closed and empty.
The large thermostats in the windows for the cretakers to see from the road ( making sure the heat is on) are still there. Restaurants are empty. The one gas station and the local sandwich/pizza shop are now closing at 5 pm due to lack of business.
Plenty of parking at the town dock, and the little ice creme/fish shack on the dock is only open for lunch 3 hours a day.
Hopefully for the local economy it will pick up some as summer really rolls in, but this is quite a scary start to what is considered prime money making time up here.
No green shoots up here.
Don in Maine
Start planting a lot of extra taters, and make sure you own a good tent...
That Golf Club isn't Sebasco is it? That's where my Grampa used to go.. IBM engineer, he was.
Nope not Sebasco, its right here.
http://www.castinegolfclub.com/
Taters, onions, and carrots... Oh my.
Don in Maine
Should go well with lobster.
You will probably be shipping fewer of them down here to South Florida, you may as well eat them.
As for us, we'll just have to eat lobster tail without the claws, our spiny lobster don't have claws.