Author Archives: CharlaHoyt

If You Own a Pitchfork, You Will Grab It When You See This Chart

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This statistic provides a pretty compelling snapshot of the severity of our income gap: In 2014, Wall Street’s bonus pool was roughly double the combined earnings of all Americans working full-time jobs at minimum wage.

That sobering tidbit came from a new Institute for Policy Studies report by Sarah Anderson, who looked at new figures from the New York State Comptroller and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The average bonus for one of New York City’s 167,800 employees in the securities industry came out to $172,860—on top of an average salary of nearly $200,000. On the other side of the equation were about one million people working full time at the federal minimum wage of $7.25.

In a recent New York Times article, Justin Wolfers, a senior fellow for the Peterson Institute for International Economics, picked apart some of the uncertainties that go into creating such a calculation, and ultimately came up with a similar result:

The count of workers at federal minimum wage includes only those who are paid hourly, and so omits those paid weekly or monthly. On the flip side, the B.L.S. count is based on income before tips and commissions, and so may overstate the number of people with low hourly earnings. And while my calculation assumed that all minimum wage workers earn $7.25 per hour, in fact many earn less than this, including wait staff and others who rely on tips, some students and young workers, certain farmworkers, and those whose bosses simply flout the minimum wage law.

For all of these uncertainties, the broad picture doesn’t change. My judgment is that we can be pretty confident that Ms. Anderson’s estimate that the sum of Wall Street bonuses is roughly twice the total amount paid to all full-time workers paid minimum wage seems like a fair characterization.

View post: 

If You Own a Pitchfork, You Will Grab It When You See This Chart

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on If You Own a Pitchfork, You Will Grab It When You See This Chart

This amazing gadget is the best technology we have for trapping CO2

This amazing gadget is the best technology we have for trapping CO2

By on 4 Feb 2015commentsShare

Here’s a shocker. It looks like one of the best weapons we have right now in the fight-to-the-death cage match that is combatting climate change is — drumroll please — planting trees!

This news comes from a report out of the University of Oxford comparing different ways of removing CO2 from the atmosphere — which is a great thing to do, because it buys us more time to get our shit together and figure out how to stop pumping out so much of the stuff in the first place.

It turns out that one hectare of forest can sequester around 3.7 tons of CO2 per year at a cost of less than 100 dollars per ton, according to the report. Plus, trees can do other cool things like improve soil quality. Aren’t trees great? If only we’d known this before!

Other carbon capturing contenders include grabbing CO2 emissions from biomass-burning plants, sucking CO2 directly out of the air, and putting lime in seawater to make it absorb more CO2. On a larger scale, all of these options would destroy trees in a contest of who can capture the most CO2, but these more techie methods come with political hurdles and high costs. Realistically, the researchers say, these options might not make a significant impact until 2050.

But fear not, treehuggers. Your beloved forests won’t have to bear this burden alone until then. Dirt also has a role to play in the more immediate carbon capture game. With better agricultural land management, we can increase the amount of organic carbon in soil. We can also burn biomass into a carbon-dense biochar and store it in soil.

So trees and dirt are where it’s at for the next few decades, the researchers say, and perhaps by mid-century, we’ll be ready to pull out the big guns.

But lest we forget, the researchers at Oxford remind us:

 “It is clear that attaining negative emissions is in no sense an easier option than reducing current emissions. To remove CO2 T on a comparable scale to the rate it is being emitted inevitably requires effort and infrastructure on a comparable scale to global energy or agricultural systems. Combined with the potentially high costs and energy requirements of several technologies, and the global effort needed to approach the technical potentials discussed previously, it is clear that very large-scale negative emissions deployment, if it were possible, is not in any sense preferable to timely decarbonisation of the energy and agricultural systems.”

Guess it’s time to plant some trees and start the revolution!

Source:
Stranded Carbon Assets and Negative Emissions Technologies Working Paper

, University of Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment.

Scientists Seeking to Save World Find Best Technology is Trees

, Bloomberg Business.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Link: 

This amazing gadget is the best technology we have for trapping CO2

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, organic, Smith's, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This amazing gadget is the best technology we have for trapping CO2

Want to Grow Vegetables In Winter? Meet the Portable Greenhouse

See the original article here – 

Want to Grow Vegetables In Winter? Meet the Portable Greenhouse

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Want to Grow Vegetables In Winter? Meet the Portable Greenhouse