Archive | Planet survival RSS feed for this section

154. Champions: Climate Change Crisis

20 Mar

This is an update on the latest efforts, findings, and theories on the Climate Change crisis. But first, I want to acknowledge the great contributions of  Ex-Veep Al Gore (who should have been elected president) in defining and promoting the climate change crisis. I also want to mention presidential candidate Governor Jay Inslee who has made climate change his most important issue. Now, there is an increasing number of leaders (mostly Dems.) who are enthusiastically promoting climate endeavors. 98% of all reputable scientists support the idea that human activities are causing global warming.

A new approach to fixing Climate Change is the work of Penny Chisholm The marine microbe Prochlorococcus draws in CO2 and uses sunlight to produce oxygen and sugar. The functioning of this microbe may hold the key to reducing CO2 in the air, saving our planet from climate-change devastation.  Since the world is not doing so well in producing less carbon dioxide, it is very important to support promising research on removing CO2 from the air. Penny Chisholm, in her recent TED talk, is one of the researchers in this area. This method may be key to saving our planet.  Please tell Trump and Congress to support research in this area and fund grants for testing. 

Another promising method to help is using Carbon Cure. It is a method of injecting CO2 into concrete. This removes it from the atmosphere and also helps to strengthen the concrete — so less is needed. Using this method, climate-change is helped in two ways. We need a President that can support climate efforts like this.

There are many other methods of carbon dioxide removal from the atmosphere, by natural and tech processes.  For a really good discussion, I recommend reading:  .

The “Green New Deal” proposed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others, is filled with good progressive ideas and emphasizes the Climate Change crisis.  Many of the Democrat Presidential candidates support the deal fully or substantially.

The President has established a Climate Change Scientific Panel to investigate. It is led by 79 y.o. William Happer, C. Fogg B. Physics Professor Emeritus at Princeton, who is notable for being the only professor stating that excess CO2 in the atmosphere is beneficial. Note that “emeritus” means retired. In essence, Happer says: don’t worry about global warming because CO2 will be good for agriculture. Many commentators believe that the president’s panel was set up just to “muddy the waters.”  The USA Military, most other countries, some CEO’s and many members of Trump’s staff are concerned about global warming dangers, which in fact, we are already experiencing.

Recent investigations of show that climate-change is taking place much faster than previously estimated. One reason is that the melting of ice exposes dark-colored earth that tends to absorb more heat. Studies of the Arctic, Antarctic, and glaciers clearly show significant changes due to warming. Please see my BasicCauses blog number 147 for more info.  Here are the references for the two most authoritative recent reports.  One is  United Nations Special Scientific Panel released October 8, 2018. This report indicates the rapid change.  The other report is the “Fourth National Climate Assessment” (Nov. 23, 2018) by US Global Change Research program.

What we must do right now is support research like removing CO2 from the air and developing better batteries for electric needs. A panel of experts chosen by the National Science Foundation (or similar) should determine where the funding goes. Mr. President, time is running out, this is your last chance to do the right thing in this area.


153. Current Issues, Briefly #2

20 Mar

This is the second of a series of blogs with brief discussions of current issues. The material is based on my Tweets, unpublished thoughts, and descriptions of various publications that are so important that they must be repeated and emphasized.

Who said: Mexico pays for wall, immediate replacement for ObamaCare, Medicare unchanged, so rich that donors not needed, ban all Muslims, climate-change is hoax, N. Korea is no longer a threat, he likes tyrants, Saudi MBS innocent, leave NATO, McCain not a hero, grab them by the pu..y ? We know who said all these things. Can anyone still support him? (Yes!, because he hates the same people that you do.)

It is very important that presidential candidates express themselves sensibly and honestly. Beto O did well when asked about healthcare. He said that Medicare-for-all was one of several good plans. Generally, anyone pledging a detailed specific plan is not realistic — too many contingencies.

Trump is angry with TV shows that mock him, but NOT the other side. Duh! You mock the bad, crude leaders, NOT those saying wise and respectable things.

For a long time, my top choice for president was Elizabeth Warren. I still think she would be a great president, but Beto O. is rising rapidly, and must be considered for his strength, popularity, sincerity, and intelligence. He may be the best for beating Trump and I agree 98% with his goals. On the other hand, Warren is coming up with some interesting tax proposals.

I am convinced that anyone over 80 is at least somewhat affected by memory loss and reduction in intellectual ability. Consequentially, I have eliminated some popular presidential candidates (B. Sanders, J. Biden, etc.) that will be over 80 by the middle of their first term in office. This is based on personal observations and established data.

As we enjoy advancing technology and cultural evolution there is a parallel development of corruption. We see this in almost every system, from car-repair to the USA gov. The latest scourge is in top college admissions; affected by bribery and false testing scores. The university admission scandal tells us at least two things. One is that many rich people are corrupt, the other is that college expenses are unjustly huge. As scammers gradually improve their skills, institutional expenses also must rise. Is there any solution to this enigma?

If you care about fixing Climate Change read this:   The marine microbe Prochlorococcus draws in CO2 and uses sunlight to produce oxygen and sugar. The functioning of this microbe may hold the key to reducing CO2 in the air, saving our planet from climate-change devastation.  Since the world is not doing so well in producing less carbon dioxide, it is very important to support promising research on REMOVING CO2 from the air. Penny Chisholm, in her recent TED talk, is one of the researchers in this area. This method may be key to saving our planet.  Please tell Trump and Congress to support research in this area and fund grants for testing. 

Carbon Cure is a method of injecting CO2 into concrete. This removes it from the atmosphere and also helps to strengthen the concrete — so less is needed. Using this method, climate-change is helped in two ways. We need a POTUS that can support climate efforts like this.

(In answer to a Sean Hannity remark.)  Repubs love to distort facts. No one advocates pure socialism, which says ideally, all citizens must have the same amount of money by a redistribution of wealth. Democrats advocate better social programs, like Medicare, where non-rich benefit, and don’t worry – greedy rich folks will still be rich.

Manafort was just given a 47 month sentence, much lighter than the guidance. The judge made some remarks that very conservative politicians would say. Pres Reagan chose the judge, T. S. Ellis, a strong Virginia conservative, a fact not often mentioned. This is an example of the continuing damage to our country: the appointment of radically conservative judges.

Tom Steyer, “need to impeach” advocate, is a true patriot and national hero. He is working hard and spending much of his own money trying to fight the corrupt Trump gov.  For more info on corruption and the Trump-Russia connection, please see my previous blogs.

Major policies are always developed at the top of an organization. The Trump staff has had numerous convictions and indictments, and has well established unethical practices. It is no longer speculative, but a fact, that the corrupt nature of his staff proves that Trump is has promoted illicit methods. He is the cause of his staff corruption and voters must take note.

According to CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, French President Emmanuel Macron is proposing significant improvements to the EU including collective defense, guarding elections, minimum wages, new tech, and climate issues. Some of this is in response to D.T. abuse. Bravo to Macron. Sad about BREXIT. Maybe there should be another vote?

It’s really important that Democrat speeches and writing are accurate. We must be better than Don Trump. Failure to be exact and correct will cause distrust. We must always be the ones to be relied upon. Also, there is no point in promoting ideas that are very extreme. The most important thing about the next election is the “defeat.”

Just read some nonsense about Democrat Candidates. The Indian problem for Eliz. Warren is nonsense and so are criticisms of Kamala Harris when she was the state AG. The problems cited have nothing to do with future performance as president. Desperate people magnify slight negatives with no significance.




147. Attention to Climate is Urgent

19 Feb

The vast majority of nations in the world understand the urgency of climate solutions. We already have worse hurricanes, new flooding, forest fires, glaciers and polar caps melting, sea levels rising, etc. The city of Venice, Italy is already sinking and flooding due to climate factors. Major USA coastal cities and most of Florida will soon be at risk.

Our President refuses to recognize this vital problem because it does not suit his billionaire friends, like the Charles and David Koch of Koch Industries. Making proper changes would cost them a few billion out of their 100 or so billion in assets. Helping his extremely rich friends (and donors) is more important than saving millions of lives and in other ways protecting the USA and many others in the world.

Two very authoritative reports have definitely concluded that the average global temperature is increasing, and the increase is caused by human activities, such as burning fossil fuels. (The Koch family has been in the oil business for decades.) One report is by a United Nations Special Scientific Panel released October 8, 2018. This report indicated that the climate is changing faster than originally anticipated. The other report is the “Fourth National Climate Assessment” (Nov. 23, 2018) by US Global Change Research program. This report is from Trumps gov and he only very reluctantly released it. The official report summary says: “Climate change creates new risks and exacerbates existing vulnerabilities in communities across the United States, presenting growing challenges to human health and safety, quality of life, and the rate of economic growth.”   Trillions of dollars and millions of lives are at stake. Contrary to his claim of “draining the swamp,” his cabinet is full of climate deniers and promoters of CO2 pollution.

The Trump position on climate-change has vacillated like many of his other concerns. In 2009 his family was a major part of a business coalition that asserted “If we fail to act now, it is scientifically irrefutable that there will be catastrophic and irreversible consequences for humanity and our planet.” Later, when running for President he labeled the issue as a “hoax” and then later, not a hoax. He said “he does not believe it.” At one time he said that the climate will change back again. When Amy Klobuchar spoke in a freezing snow storm, he inferred that this disproves global warming. Trump does not understand that local weather is not relevant to global average temperature increases. Trumps Secretary of State Tillerson urged him not to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement. That apparently led to his being fired.

Recent scientific research has indicated that we have about 10 years to make major changes in climate factors, such as burning fuels that send carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. We must spend some money on converting to battery operated cars and converting to cleaner power plants. Our gov must support research and incentives in these areas.  We must also support promising research on methods for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Time is running out and all possible solutions must be supported.  Please see my previous blogs for more discussions on climate.








140. Shut-Down Reveals Motives

25 Jan

The government shut-down, resulting from failure to pass a spending bill, is a national tragedy.  Many government workers and gov projects are severely affected by the lack of wages paid and other various non-funding. I sometimes suspect that this serious problem is Trump’s revenge for the investigations.  An interesting result of this conflict is that the negotiations and numerous related comments have revealed hidden motives and strategies. (Maybe not so hidden, for many analysts.)

I am sure that many Trump supporters are living paycheck-to-paycheck. These devotees must be shocked by the lack of concern about gov shut-down employee, that have unpaid wages.  While most employees will eventually be reimbursed, regular contractors may not receive anything. Here are some comments. Trump says that these people will “adjust,” they can always find a way. Really? His daughter-in-law Lara says that they will only feel “a little pain.” Sec. of Commerce Wilber Ross says they can get a loan. The Trump family and administration is mostly composed of hugely rich people. Does it sound like they have any appreciation for the results of lost wages ??

When Trump terminated the DACA law, he said that Congress can restore it. This sounded puzzling to me. Now I understand. DACA was terminated so that it could be used for future leverage  negotiations, and it just has been. Obviously, Trump does not care about these people (mostly good tax-paying people) at all, they are just pawns in his schemes. For Trump, everyone is a pawn except for his super-rich buddies, family, and a few of associates.

The way that Congressmen vote on various “shut-down” bills tells you a lot about their character.

Nancy Pelosi has been very adamant about not supporting any money at all for the wall. I have thought about this a lot and today I think I better understand her strategy. My initial thought, and what others have said, is that it like NOT negotiating with terrorists, because more people will get kidnaped if it is rewarded. So don’t give in to Trump to avoid future leverages. But there may be an additional factor. Instead of moving on impeachment, which is chancy, she wants to stop Trump by giving him a major defeat. Losing the shut-down battle may inhibit him from doing other worse things. Continuing the shut-down is harmful, but may less so that an unchecked Trump.

The USA, our lovely homeland, is caught up in traps that have possible remedies, but the remedies will only be achieved with a great concerted effort. Some damage, like radical conservative judges at every level. will be relatively permanent. The current administration has reversed climate-change efforts. Lack of worldwide climate efforts is already causing hurricane and flooding catastrophes, and will ultimately cause the death of many more people. My last word is to thank the many politicians and citizens that have good will and are working on our many problems.





132. Latest Climate Change Info: Simplified

29 Dec

It is vital that our government supports climate change programs.The dangers are serious and some harmful effects are already happening. Helping people and leaders to understand the science is my contribution. Here are the fundamentals, briefly:

Light from Sun >> Heats earth >> Heat energy Rises /\ /\  from earth
Some rising heat is blocked ]]]] from escaping by gases like CO2
Burning fuel increases CO2 causing more ]]]]]] blockage & warmth

More Detail:
Light from the Sun passes through our atmosphere and warms our planet. The resulting heat rises and some is blocked from escaping into space by “greenhouse” gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, water, and others. Small quantities of these gases are naturally in the atmosphere, and the amount is relatively stable.

But when we burn fuel and create more heat-blocking CO2, there is excessive planet warming. CO2 and other “greenhouse gases” are like a blanket around our planet. See below for more scientific detail.

How do we know that planet warming is caused by human activity?
1, The carbon dioxide emitted by burning coal, natural gas, and oil has a unique chemical pattern — and the additional CO2 in the atmosphere bears that signature. (See below for more detail.)

2. The CO2 and warming are closely correlated with the history of the industrial revolution, which involved the burning of coal and gasolene. As the usage of fossil fuels increased, the warming increased. During the history of the Earth, there were temperature cycles, but these natural cycles are very much slower than the current rapid temperature warming. No other “natural” factors could have caused this increase. See this NASA reference for actual data:

What are the dangers of global warming? Warming causes arctic and other northern ice to melt. This is already well established by photographic evidence. The consequence is warmer oceans, rising sea levels, and changes in ocean currents.

The warming of oceans increases the strength of hurricanes. In recent years, hurricanes are worse than before. Changes in ocean currents shift land temperatures and rainfall so that some lands (like California) are drier and other places are flooded. Inhabited land that is close (or even less than) sea level is starting to flood, due to a slight rise in sea level. A good example is flooding in Venice, Italy, where the sea level has consistently risen by a total of 26cm since 1870. Many highly populated coastal areas of the USA are vulnerable. Some ocean islands are no longer habitable.

Scientists have spent thousands of hours recording and studying these factors. All of these facts are published in reputable scientific journals and magazines, such as Scientific American and Science. All reputable scientists support these findings. A recent official government report and NASA report supports all these facts. Politicians sometimes dispute these facts because their donors might need to spend money to correct their operations. Scientists are not political with respect to science.
Added scientific clarifications
Rising heat energy (infrared radiation) is effectively  “blocked” by CO2 and other greenhouse gases. Most of our atmosphere consists of oxygen and nitrogen, which are small molecules and have little effect on rising heat. Greenhouse gases like CO2 have larger molecules and can absorb heat energy. Shortly after absorption, the heat energy is re-emitted in any direction. The part that goes downward tends to warm the earth. Long before humans inhabited the Earth, greenhouse gases were in the atmosphere at an almost fixed level as a result of opposing processes that produced an equilibrium. These gases warmed the Earth enough to make it habitable for humans and other animals. Burning fuels has increased the heat, causing harmful effects.

CO2 from fuel burning can be identified because it contains tiny amounts of certain inert (noble) gases, Other “natural” CO2 has a different pattern of these inert gases. This is often referred to as a “fingerprint.

Scientists have been working diligently on the problem of added global warming. There are basically two types of solution:  1. Reduce the burning of fuels by producing alternative energy like windmills and solar arrays, and 2. Develop industrial processes for removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Number 1 is already in major use. Number 2 is being developed by researchers, but the effectiveness is not yet known . Our gov needs to support BOTH of these efforts, trying to remove CO2 (etc) from the atmosphere will not be enough.

Valuable References
Here is a scientific reference on CO2 effects
 Bibliographies for climate change (here are 2 of many): (USA Forest Service)  Government Report:
 NASA info:  (this is excellent)

131. Tech Advances Needed for Survival

8 Dec

I read a wide variety of publications and often find that great technological advances are met with fear and inappropriate limitations. Our planet is rapidly changing by increasing populations and by ignoring important factors like climate change. People are afraid of GMOs, automation, robots, vaccines, DNA innovations, and even medical pills. All of us on Earth are facing very serious problems, and we must rely on reputable science to provide solutions. Below is a brief discussion of three out of the many major issues, which I hope will serve as a stimulus for further research.

GMOs.  I provided detailed info on GMOs in a previous blog (number 87). The simple fact is that nature (without warning us) is constantly changing plant and animal DNA. Evolution selects for survival, not for the human health of a food source. On the other hand, when scientists develop a GMO, we know about it, and it can be tested for health factors. Lets promote GMO evaluation and research, and not abolish them.

CLIMATE CHANGE TECH.  Failure to deal with man-made global warming (see my blogs number 34 and 126) can lead to changes in ocean currents and wind. The consequence will be new patterns of flooding and some normal areas will become deserts. These changes will cause serious hunger problems and horrible mass migrations, unless we deal with these issues in advance. There is research on technology that could reduce the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and there are other tech innovations that can help  us. Let’s encourage and financially support tech and scientific research in this area.

ROBOTS AND AUTOMATION.  Many people (particularly workers) are fearful of advances in this area. Consider this: robots and AI are now used extensively in many industries (e.g. auto manufacture), and unemployment in the USA is way down, and there are no other problems of note. Like any other  tech, robots must be programmed and used carefully. In the future, robots could help shorten working times and improve worker safety. 

CONCLUSION: TWO PATHS.  We have serious choices to make. We can put money and effort into new tech and science, or take the negative path. It is very interesting that some in our current gov do not trust experts in climate changes, but do trust experts in military details and weapons development.  Could it be that climate solutions negatively affect greedy rich manufacturers, while the rich and powerful enjoy better weapons to preserve their enterprises.  

Here is what I think! Any tech innovation has some element of risk, which can be minimized by hiring top experts for evaluations. On the other hand, I think discouraging innovation can be much more dangerous.  Worldwide current thinking, if not corrected, can lead to major wars, starvation, worse mass migrations, and horrible increased poverty. Encouraging science/tech education and support is crucial.



129. Trump vs Hillary Administration

24 Nov

I often think about how the USA would be different if Hillary Clinton had won the election. Here is my comparison of the real Trump and my speculation about Hillary, based on her extensive experiences: first lady, Senator, Secretary of State, and a successful candidacy for POTUS (won popular vote by 2.7m).

Trump: Because of a questionable history involving fraud (Trump Univ, etc), failure to divest (hotel revenue from foreign leaders), and election irregularities, and other failures, Trump could not hire top cabinet members and advisory personnel. His primary concern had to be loyalty, rather than ability.
Hillary: Her varied experiences and association with Pres. Obama would have enhanced her ability to hire top personnel. There would be no loyalty limitations. She could hire top university professors, top scientists, top officials, top economists, and experts in many areas. Look at Trumps turn-over rate.

Trump: A horrendous record of thousands of lies and extreme exaggerations.
Hillary: No need to lie. She would value a reputation for truth and reliability.

Trump: Efforts to fulfill ridiculous campagne promises, like a South border wall to prevent illegal immigration.
Hillary: Realistic campagne promises that could be worked on during her office.

Trump: Petty name calling and childish conflicts, often with very respectable people.
Hillary: She would treat good people with proper respect, even if they made critical remarks.

Trump: He tried to break up NATO and destroy our valuable relationships with traditional allies.
Hillary: She would have preserved NATO, the UN, and other international organizations. We would have maintained our powerful and helpful, long-term allies.

Trump: No respect from foreign leaders.
Hillary: Her past experience as Sec of State and many other relationships with leaders would have engendered great respect.

Trump: Refuses to respect and believe our intelligence agencies. This promotes distrust by many parties and bad international actions.
Hillary: Always respected the intelligence agencies.

Trump: Makes impulsive decisions, not considering all the implications that are relevant. Example is our trade policies that have resulted in job loss.
Hillary: Trained to make careful decisions based on real gov experience.

Trump: Does not believe human-influenced climate change, that all reputable scientists confirm.
Hillary: Would have promoted responsible actions to avoid climate disasters. She also would have encouraged many energy-saving plans.

Trump: Gave us conservative Supreme Court justices that could undue numerous valuable laws and regulations.
Hillary: Better justices in all courts.

Trump: Withdrew the USA from several important treaties. This makes the US appear unreliable and discourages agreements with other nations.
Hillary: Most existing treaties would be maintained.

Trump: Is influenced by countries such as Russia likely because of financial entanglements. He clearly favored actions by Putin. Also he supported Saudi leader that murdered a Wash-Post associate.
Hillary: No foreign influence. Decisions only made which are for the good of our country.

Trump: Developed a policy of reducing gov regulations. Some of the regulations provided pollution safeguards. People will die from toxins.
Hillary: Would keep all appropriate regulations and would emphasize health.

Trump: Promotes seriously bad immigration policies such as separation of parents and children. He does not care about human suffering. He also moved thousands of troops to the border for only political purposes.
Hillary: Would never make such policies.

Trump: Our various agencies have been gutted and the Secretaries often sabotage the agency traditional goals; example EPA.
Hillary: Just the opposite.

Trump: Promised to drain the swamp but hired extremely rich agency chiefs that have wasted money and misused various funds.
Hillary: Would have hired responsible leaders.

Trump: Inappropriate in dealing with many important situations. For example, he said that bad forest management was responsible for the fires and promoted a ridiculous plan of raking 33 million acres of forest.
Hillary: would have been appropriately concerned and would have provided financial assistance.

Trump: Was tricked by the North Korean leader. He is still working on bombs and inter-continental missiles. Kim raised his international position at our expense.
Hillary: Knew that Kim would not be reliable and would have anticipated his tricks.

Trump: Ignores experts at our gov agencies, like the State Dept. He does not coordinate well which his agency secretaries so that foreign leaders don’t know what to believe.
Hillary: Would have made great use out of experts throughout the gov.

Trump: Press is enemy of the people.
Hillary: Not enemy.

I could add more, but I think I will stop here. You get the point. Hillary Clinton would have provided responsible and reliable leadership (no short-sighted tweet decisions), would have enhanced respect for the USA, and would have gathered around her the very top-most experts to guide her decisions.