Fuel Economy….The President Clearly Does not Understand the Term LEADERSHIP

In yet another move to undo what makes sense for the country, it appears that fuel economy standards will be rolled back from the goals set during President Obama’s administration. Well, why not. As I have noted in prior blogs, this President really is all about short term benefits for fossil fuels.

Fuel EconomyOf course, this is just a part of the mistaken world of “let’s take it now and the hell with the future” that he is proving to be his M.O. Every time that fuel standards have been raised, the auto industry has cried…and then met them. The argument now is of course, that people want bigger cars and trucks because fuel is relatively cheap.

Thus, my title…LEADERSHIP means leading…not following the sheep. As soon as prices for oil rise, which they will at some point, we will switch again and fuel economy will become important. But, rather than leading us into a better and more economically and environmentally sustainable world, the ignorant are pandering to the informed who can manipulate them.

Read the full article:
Automakers Near a Victory on Rollback of Fuel Standards
Limited free access; NY Times subscription may be required.

Share

So, to Combat Global Warming, Let’s build Floating Islands.

Ok, there are many causes of climate change. There are even those who completely ignore the facts, don’t think that science is real and would rather think about short term profits at the expense of our future.

I am not certain that a floating island (not the dessert) is a real or economically feasible solution, but I have to give those that have designed this idea kudos for at least thinking.

global warming

I really don’t think that this is a good idea, but of course, I don’t live in a country that might disappear due to the inaction of those countries that could really change the trend towards a changing climate.

Who knows, maybe it will work. But at what cost?

Read the full article:
As Climate Change Accelerates, Floating Cities Look Like Less of a Pipe Dream
Limited free access; NY Times subscription may be required.

Share

DART Misses the Bullseye with its Greenwashing Efforts…

Styrofoam fights come and go. NYC was stopped from enacting its styrofoam ban by good legal maneuvering by DART Corporation and by DART’s ridiculous claims that styrofoam food containers are easy to recycle.

The reality is that anything can probably be recycled from a pure chemistry standpoint. The point is, can it be sustainably recycled?

In this case, the answer is no. Styrofoam is essentially air and polystyrene. When recyclers move materials they need to move large loads by weight over the shortest distance possible with the material having the greatest value possible.

Styrofoam food packaging fails on almost all fronts. It does have a potential value, but shipping it to the midwest is not the solution.

Styrofoam beads in residue

It is also a significant contaminant as you can see in the photos posted. These photos are at a paper mill that makes new paper from old cardboard boxes. All that white junk is styrofoam packaging. Not really useful.

Styrofoam in pulp residue

Styrofoam food packaging is a product whose time has come and gone. It is not sustainable, it is harmful from an environmental standpoint and it wastes resources.

Any claims to the contrary are greenwashing.

Read the full article:
N.J. schools make efforts to ban Styrofoam food containers

Share

Pity the BeeKeeper

Of the 100 crops that account for 90% of the food eaten by people; 71% are pollinated by bees…So notes the NY Times in its recent article on beekeepers. But, as I have noted before, bees are having a very hard time of it lately…and as noted before, many are dying each year. Indeed, the article notes that 44% died as of April 2016 compared to 17% on a bad year in the past.

beekeeperWhat does that mean? Well, besides the cost of food rising, it means that something is killing the very creatures that our food supply relies upon. And more importantly, no one really knows why this is happening.

There is strong evidence that pesticides are the culprit, but other causes are also possible.

Now, let me say that the thrust of this article is that the largest beekeepers have a good deal of work to help them financially. However, it is not always about the money (the President’s personal views notwithstanding).

We need to carefully examine the issues around bee death.

More importantly, each of us should do something that helps bees do well. That means that we can improve our own backyards to enhance bee habitat. Look into this if you will and do your small part.

Read the full article:
A Bee Mogul Confronts the Crisis in His Field
Limited free access; NY Times subscription may be required.

Share