You don’t have to be an expert to make a difference

“You don’t have to be an expert to make a difference.” Gerald Durrell

Who is Gerald Durrell? If you watched the BBC show “The Durrells in Corfu,” you would know Jerry was the young boy who loved all animals, birds, reptiles and insects. This true story was based on this progressive zookeeper’s book “My family and other animals,” which was a best seller in the UK in the 1950s.

The context for the quote was his warning that humans were destroying the forests to harvest the wood and farm the land. We were killing off the homes to many animals. This was prescient and could reemphasized today.

Yet, the quote applies to so much more. We do not have to be expert on climate change to make a difference. We do not have to be expert on the long lifespan of plastic to use fewer plastic contsiners. We do not need to be an expert to know we need to use our water resources wisely.

And, to Durrell’s point, we do need to be an expert to preserve and replenish forests. Trees, mangroves, etc. are also carbon eaters, so it is not just the animals we are protecting. Remember the title of the best seller above.

The Good and Bad

Several stories crossed my screen, so I decided to pair good and bad news items on related topics.

Good: Ford and Volkswagen are co-investing in developing electric vehicles sharing development costs.

Bad: In spite of the significant decline in bee populations, the Trump administration has approved a bee-harmlng pesticide.

Good: The American economy is now into its 121st consecutive month of growth with nine straight years of 2 million plus jobs created.

Bad: The 2019 economy has softened some from 2018 due to trade/ tariff concerns, slowing global markets, waning impact of the 2017 tax law, growing US debt, and increased uncertainty which impedes investment and it should slow even more as predicted by economists.

Good: The interest in space travel and exploration involves an increasing number of countries – Japan and China have gone to the moon, eg. That spawns more interest in science which is terrific.

Bad: With the heavy cost of space travel, why don’t countries share the burden as Ford and Volkswagen are doing above? There is a lot of dupication of effort requiring money that could be invested here on earth to address water, food and climate issues.

Good: In spite of the US announcing a withdrawal from the Paris Climate Change Accord, other countries, states, cities, investment groups, companies and innovators continue to execute ideas that are addressing the issue.

Bad: The US federal governmenf needs to do more, not less to abet these efforts. Yet, another concern is getting little notoriety – the global water crisis, which is made even worse by climate change. Another city in India of 5 million people is in dire straights as its reservoir has almost dried up.

We should celebrate the good, but address the bad. We seem to be ignoring too many signals. It is hard to move forward, if we only look in the rearview. mirror. Food, water, climate, debt are signaling needs that must be addressed.

 

 

 

Rachel Carson, a silent, but forceful hero

It is hard to go against the grain. It is especially hard when you are a 5’4″ woman in a man’s scientific world that boldly said we can tame nature. Yet, when Rachel Carson wrote her provocative book “Silent Spring” in 1962, she rocked the world of the chemical industry. PBS’ “American Experience” has an excellent episode on Carson.

While her book was fiercely discredited by various “throw something against the wall” attacks by the chemical industry, it helped define how we need to proceed with more precaution. It laid bare the hubris of those who felt they could control nature.

It also started a grassroots environmental movement. Within ten years, the toxic chemical DDT would be banned and the Environmental Protection Agency would be created. Her testimony to Congress abetted these efforts. The Cuyahoga river in Cleveland catching fire also was a clarion call. Yet, she would not live to see them. She had cancer when she was being interviewed and testifying to Congress dying in 1964.

“Silent Spring” was her fourth best seller. The first was her “The Sea Around Us” published ten years earlier. Her first topic called upon her marine biology degree and work at the National Wildlife and Fisheries Department. Her first published book in 1941 called “Under the Sea Wind” was re-released after the second one’s success and sold well. Her “The Edge of the Sea” published in 1955 also was a best seller.

Her voice came at a time when “more chemicals” was the answer to any question. She was troubled that our arrogance was getting ahead of our wisdom. Her voice gained footing when it became apparent some fishermen had radiation poisoning from drifted winds from a hydrogen bomb test. But, she had been concerned about the unbridled use of pestiides for years.

A few chapters of “Silent Spring” were printed in The New Yorker and caused such an uproar that a Science Commission was set-up even before the book was released. President Kennedy made reference to Carson in a Q/A with reporters. She understood the use of pesticides is necessary – her main thrust is we need more testing before they are used. The chemical industry went after her and said she was undermining progress. She was called a communist and her data was more anecdotal. And, the fact she was a woman unnerved industry scientists, who felt she was infringing on their turf.

The book was a runaway best seller. It was highlighted in 70 newspapers. When she answered her critics, only then did they realize the power of her calm and informed voice. They were unable to silence her, though they gamely tried to stop a CBS Special Report featuring an interview with Carson. While two sponsors were pressured to drop out, CBS held their ground. For every question answered, there were 100 more raised.

The CBS Special Report was seen by as many as 15 million people. Carson was quite believable.  It was so impactful, a Congressional Committee was set-up the next day. A few months later, the earlier established Kennedy commission verified her findings as vindication.

As she told Congress we must measure the hidden costs against the potential gains. Shouldn’t we do that with every issue? And, for that she was vilified. However, her most telling testimony is our children have been born into this chemical age and we don’t know the full impact on their lives. As one historian noted in the “American Experience” documentary, she caused a “paradigm shift.” Thank you Ms. Carson.

Citing climate differences, Shell walks away from U.S. refining lobby

Last month. Reuters wrote an article entitled “Citing climate differences, Shell walks away from US refining lobby.” Here are the lead paragraphs.

“Royal Dutch Shell Plc on Tuesday became the first major oil and gas company to announce plans to leave a leading U.S. refining lobby due to disagreement on climate policies.

The review is part of Shell’s drive to increase transparency and show investors it is in line with the 2015 Paris climate agreement’s goals to limit global warming by reducing carbon emissions to a net zero by the end of the century.

It is also the latest sign of how investor pressure on oil companies, particularly in Europe, is leading to changes in their behavior around climate. Last year, Shell caved in to investor pressure over climate change, setting out plans to introduce industry-leading carbon emissions targets linked to executive pay.”

Shell is not the first oil company to cave to investor pressure. Exxon Mobil and Occidental Petroleum (along with utility PP&L) have to inform shareholders of their progress to addressing climate change after shareholder votes required them to do so. Exxon also has two lawsuits it is dealing with accusing them of misleading investors on the financial impact of climate change.

Climate change is real and is impacting us now. The greater number of sunny days coastal flooding, increased number of droughts, increased and more severe forest fires and the added flooding due to slow moving storns are traceable to the impact of climate change, so says climate scientists. I encourage you to ask politicians what they propose to do about this existential threat to our future. If they do not respond or fail to offer any tangible ideas, do not vote for them. We must move forward as we have squandered much of our window to act.

 

The time has come

It is reported the ice caps are melting at a faster rate than predicted. Coastal cities have seen increasing days of sunny day flooding. Extreme flooding is occurring as larger weather systems are stalling. And, drought areas are seeing more severe drought and forest fires are larger and more frequent.

The time has come to move forward in a concerted manner to address climate change. Efforts to waylay climate change actions must be highlighted and remedied. This should not be a political issue, but the fossil fuel industry has its foot on too many politicians’ throats.

That must change. I believe people who see the problems occurring now must act. Ask every politician what they plan to do about climate change. If the person gives a trite, dismissive answer, say that is not an acceptable answer.  The problem exists and we need to do something about it.

Even an older GOP Senator from Iowa called the President on the carpet for his “idiotic” comment about wind energy. When the President said wind mills cause cancer, Senator Chuck Grassley said that was “idiotic” and added that he was the “father of wind energy tax credits.” It should be noted Iowa gets 1/3 of its electricity from wind energy. That is forward thinking, but is not new. Oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens said wind energy was the future about eight years ago, once we bought time with natural gas. We have.

The time has come. Do not worry about being passionate as we need more fervent action.

Why are you ignoring climate change?

My home state of Florida is surrounded on three sides by sea water. And, Miami has been noted as the most at risk large city in the world to rising sea levels, with two climate scientists pessimistically saying Miami cannot be saved from its demise.

Yet, its two Senators are climate change deniers. The newest Senator, Rick Scott forbade his staff while Governor from using the terms climate change or global warming in print or speeches. Why the Voldemort approach to climate change is a good question?

Recently, the senior Senator Marco Rubio, noted his disapproval with the President’s emergency declaration. His argument is what would prevent President Kamala Harris from declaring an emergency to fight climate change? I agree with his disapproval, but not his example. There is no emergency at the border, so says Trump’s own administration. But, his own administration has written a report speaking of climate change as a significant problem. In fact, the Department of Defense says climate change is a threat to national security.

On “60 Minutes” this Sunday they reported on the progress of the climate change lawsuit against federal inaction by twenty kids. The attorney notes that their best data comes from the US government who has known for decades about fossil fuel worsening climate change. It should be noted the lawsuits against Exxon Mobil by their shareholders and three states uses a lot of Exxon’s own reports.

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is being vilified by Conservatives for  her Green New Deal. She has become their new pinata replacing Hillary and Nancy. While there a few bridge-too-far parts to the plan, it is something to discuss and build from. Let me ask who is crazier, someone who recgonizes the greatest threat to our planet along with the limited time to address it, or someone who is too scared to say Voldemort’s name?

As an Independent voter who left the GOP twelve years ago primarily due to its Voldemort stance on climate change, i applaud that someone is making a stand. People must ask all politicians about their position on climate change. If it is like that of the two Florida Senators, people need to avoid voting for them. This is that important.

An unlikely transformative genius

If you watched “60 Minutes” on CBS last night, you may have seen the interview with Lesley Stahl and a game changing self-made scientist named Marshall Medoff. This 81 year-old, eccentric inventor has researched and created a breakthrough idea that will help move the dial on biomass energy, plastics and even sugar. What you might ask?

Medoff has succeeded in the release of cellulose that is ingrained in all plant products in an elegant fashion. Where MIT and others have failed to cost effectively do so, he has developed the concept of using an electron beam accelerator to blast the cellulose out of the plant materials. This is fascinating enough, but this man is a self-taught scientist. And, to add to the story even more, he came to the idea at Walden Pond in Massachusetts, where he lives nearby. What a great place to think of how to unleash the power of plants.

Yet, Medoff’s invention is beyond the idea stage. Investors are so enthralled, they have invested in his company called Xyleco and there is a facility in Moss Lake, WA in production. This place employs trained and educated chemical scientists and engineers. He also has a testing facility in Massachusetts near where he lives, employing many scientists from MIT and elsewhere.

On his Board of Directors are Bob Armstrong, the former head of MIT’s chemistry department and Steven Chu, the former Director of Energy under President Obama, and several other known advisors, including John Jennings, the former CEO of Shell. They all claim this man is an Edison-like genius, who is a tad eccentric. And, as Armstrong pointed out MIT and others have failed to do what he has done.

These Board members echo his enthusiasm to make a 30% or so dent in the energy business with a 77% more efficient biomass fuel than ethanol. Also, with petroleum-based plastic a huge issue on the environment, one of his scientists demonstrated a plant-based plastic that can have a planned disintegration at the end of its usefulness.  And, if that were not enough, a sugar byproduct called xylose, or wood sugar, is less in calories and has a smaller impact on teeth.

If it were April Fool’s Day, this would seem like a great story to fool people with. The exciting part is Medoff is legitimate. A key side bar is fifteen years ago, he decided to work on this problem to fight climate change. So, he read everything on the subject. And, then started putting together ideas and patents. One of his Board members said this eccentric old man had the confidence that he could do this. That can-do attitude is part of a genius’ make-up.

https://www.localbuzzot.com/2019/01/07/marshall-medoff-the-unlikely-eccentric-inventor-turning-inedible-plant-life-into-fuel-60-minutes/