Tag Archives: california

Yep, Gasoline Lead Explains the Crime Decline in Canada Too

Mother Jones

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

Erik Eckholm of the New York Times writes that violent crime has plunged dramatically over the past two decades. But the reasons remain elusive:

There are some areas of consensus. The closing of open-air drug markets….revolution in urban policing….increases in drug and gun sentences….Various experts have also linked the fall in violence to the aging of the population, low inflation rates and even the decline in early-childhood lead exposure. But in the end, none of these factors fully explain a drop that occurred, in tandem, in much of the world.

“Canada, with practically none of the policy changes we point to here, had a comparable decline in crime over the same period,” said Franklin E. Zimring, a law professor and an expert in criminal justice at the University of California, Berkeley. He described the quest for an explanation as “criminological astrology.”

I’m happy to see lead at least get a shout out. Unless I’ve missed something, this might actually be the first time the New York Times has ever mentioned childhood lead exposure as a possible explanation for the decline in violent crime. Progress!

But while Eckholm is right to say that none of the other factors he mentions can explain a decline in violent crime that happened all over the world, he’s wrong to include lead in that list. It’s the one explanation that does have the potential to explain a worldwide drop in crime levels. In particular, the chart on the right shows the use of gasoline lead in Canada, which peaked in the mid-70s and then began dropping as catalytic converters became more common. Leaded gasoline was banned for good in 1990, and is now virtually gone with a few minor exceptions for specialized vehicles.

So what happened? As Zimring says, Canada saw a substantial decrease in violent crime that started about 20 years after lead emissions began to drop, which is exactly what you’d expect. I calculated the numbers for Canada’s biggest cities back when I was researching my lead-crime piece, and crime was down from its peak values everywhere: 31 percent in Montreal, 36 percent in Edmonton, 40 percent in Toronto and Vancouver, and 53 percent in Ottawa. CompStat and broken windows and American drug laws can’t explain that.

“Criminological astrology” is a good phrase to describe the relentless effort of US criminologists to explain a worldwide phenomenon using only parochial US data. But there is one explanation that really does work pretty well everywhere: the reduction in gasoline lead, which happened all over the world, but happened at different times in different places. And everywhere it happened, crime started to decline about 20 years later. No explanation is ever perfect, but this one comes closer than most.

See more here: 

Yep, Gasoline Lead Explains the Crime Decline in Canada Too

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yep, Gasoline Lead Explains the Crime Decline in Canada Too

Governor-Elect Laments the Californication of Texas

Mother Jones

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

Local fracking bans. Laws outlawing plastic bags. Strict tree-cutting ordinances. Another day in California? Nope. Welcome to life in urban Texas, where Democratic-controlled city councils are enacting powerful consumer and environmental protections—much to the chagrin of the state’s leading conservatives. “Texas is being California-ized, and you might not even be noticing it,” Gov.-elect Greg Abbott complained last week at a meeting of the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation. “We’re forming a patchwork quilt of bans and rules and regulations that is eroding the Texas model.”

This, he added, is a nasty “form of collectivism” that could “turn the Texas miracle into the California nightmare.”

Though California has long been a conservative bête noire, Abbott’s comments highlight a rising fear among Texas Republicans. More than half of all Texans now live in 10 large urban counties that are growing much faster than the state as a whole. Their voters tend to be more liberal than other Texans, a trend that’s accelerating as minorities, young people, and out-of-staters settle there, lured by cosmopolitan neighborhoods and good jobs. According to a 2012 analysis by the Houston Chronicle and San Antonio Express-News, 70 percent of Democratic gains in Texas since 2000 have come from the four counties that encompass Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, and Austin. All of them voted for Barack Obama in 2012.

In a state known for caring more about hot-button social issues than consumer or environmental protections, it should come as no surprise that urbanites would turn to their city councils to tackle quality-of-life issues the state prefers to ignore. The fracking ban enacted this November in Denton, a college town near Dallas in the gas-rich Barnett Shale formation, is a case in point: It might have never passed had residents felt the state was doing enough to protect them. “It says the industry can’t come in and do whatever they want to do to people,” Cathy McMullen, the head of the Denton Drilling Awareness Group, told the Washington Post. “They can’t drill a well 300 feet from a park anymore. They can’t flare 200 feet from a child’s bedroom anymore.”

Last week, the governor-elect went on to suggest that the Legislature should crush such liberal local regulations. “My vision,” Abbot said, “is one where individual liberties are not bound by city limit signs.”

But critics quickly accused him of hypocrisy. “It’s disappointing to hear the governor-elect wants to overrule the will of city voters on a range of issues,” Bennett Sandlin, the executive director of the Texas Municipal League, which represents city governments, said in a press release. “It amounts to the same kind of governmental overreach at the state level that he opposes when it comes from Washington.”

That the new governor has so quickly backed himself into a rhetorical corner may reflect his party’s increasingly cramped political circumstances. Demographic trends strongly suggest that Texas will turn blue. The state GOP, sandwiched in between the big federal government and a lot of pesky little local ones, almost seems to be defending the political equivalent of the Alamo.

Almost, but not quite: The Alamo is in San Antonio, now a stronghold of Democrats.

Read the article:

Governor-Elect Laments the Californication of Texas

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, Mop, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Governor-Elect Laments the Californication of Texas

Invasion of the Hedge Fund Almonds

Mother Jones

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

By Tom Philpott | Mon Jan. 12, 2015 6:00 AM ET

On a sunbaked August morning, off a rural road in the heart of California’s Central Valley, a low-slung tractor rumbles between neat rows of identical, light-green trees. To its right, a plume of dust billows up, thick enough to blot out the sky above the treetops. A chute on the truck sends a steady stream of almonds flying into the trailer hitched behind.

Sweating as I skitter around to avoid the moving tractor, I’m witnessing what has emerged as one of the Central Valley’s most lucrative rituals: the almond harvest. Here in western Fresno County, which generates more than a fifth of California’s almonds, production has more than doubled since 2005. Almonds are now nearly as valuable as the state’s vaunted grape harvest.

Learn more about photographer Matt Black’s project documenting the communities affected by the California drought.

Another truck has already been through the orchard, armed with a giant metal forceps that grabs each tree trunk and shakes it violently for a few seconds, sending nuts clattering to the ground like a slow-moving hailstorm. Next, sweepers come through, mounding the almonds into long, narrow piles along the center of each row. Last comes the harvester to hoover them up.

The pale, sandy soil is bone-dry—hence all the dust. But that has nothing to do with the drought that is gripping California, the region’s worst in decades. The San Joaquin Valley, which forms the southern half of the 450-mile-long Central Valley, is technically a desert: In good years, it relies on irrigation water guided in from mountain ranges to the north and east through an impressive system of channels. And in the weeks before a harvest, almond farmers cut way back on watering, both to hasten the ripening of the nuts and to ensure a dry bed for them when they fall. The harvest is a notoriously hot, dusty affair.

Charts and maps by Julia Lurie and Lei Wang.

As I gape at the efficiency on display—just a few workers and machines can harvest thousands of trees in several hours—an angry voice cuts through the truck’s roar. “Hey!” It’s a guy who looks to be in his 20s, slender, in a dusty baseball cap, a plaid shirt, and jeans. He says he’s heard from my travel companions—a photographer and an almond specialist from the University of California Cooperative Extension named Gurreet Brar—that I’m a magazine writer looking into California’s almond boom. He demands to know what my angle is. Am I going to blame almonds for the state’s mounting water woes, like other articles have?

When I assure him I’m after the whole story, he softens. He declines to give his name or be interviewed at length, but says his family farms almonds, apricots, and raisin grapes. Now they’re pulling the grapes to put in more almonds—raisins, he explains, aren’t a very well-marketed crop, so it’s harder to make a profit. And with that, he excuses himself to go manage the harvest.

His logic is unassailable. Almond products—snack mixes, butters, milk—are flying off supermarket shelves. The value of the California almond market hit $4.8 billion in 2012—that’s triple the level of a decade earlier. Only dairy is worth more to the state than almonds and grapes. In fact, almonds, along with California-grown pistachios and walnuts, are becoming so lucrative that big investment funds, eager to get in on the boom, are snapping up land and dropping in trees.

There’s just one problem: Almond orchards require about a third more water per acre than grape vineyards. In fact, they’re one of California’s thirstiest crops. It takes a gallon of water to produce a single almond—more than three times the amount required for a grape and two and a half times as much for a strawberry. There’s more water embedded in just four almonds than there is in a full head of lettuce. But unlike row crops, which farmers can choose not to plant during dry spells, almond trees must be watered no matter what.

In the midst of the worst drought in California’s history, you might expect almonds’ extreme thirst to be a deal breaker. But it’s not. In fact, the drought has had hardly any impact at all on the almond boom. The state’s farmers bought at least 8.33 million young almond trees between July 2013 and July 2014, a 25 percent increase from the previous year. About a quarter of the saplings went to replace old orchards, but most of the rest were new plantings, some 48,000 acres’ worth, an area equal to three Manhattans.

A worker drives a harvester through an orchard.

In order to thrive, almond trees need a Mediterranean climate, hot summers and mild winters. Those come free in the Central Valley. But steady access to water is just as crucial to an almond grove’s success. So where is the water for all these new orchards coming from? No longer California’s famed irrigation projects, which draw on the state’s rivers and have slowed to a trickle during the drought. Instead, farmers are tapping into groundwater.

In all of the other water-scarce states in the West, authorities restrict how much water a user can pump out of the ground. But in California, landowners can drop a well wherever they want, unimpeded by the state. Some counties require permits for wells (though they’re usually easy to get), and in a few Central Valley watersheds, things have gotten so contentious that courts have stepped in to limit water pumping. But mostly, California groundwater is yours for the taking. As the State Water Resources Control Board puts it on its website, “To get a right to groundwater, you simply extract the water and use it for a beneficial purpose.”

As a result, Central Valley farmers have for years been drawing down groundwater at an alarming rate. Between 2003 and 2010, the valley’s aquifers lost a total of 20 cubic kilometers of groundwater—enough to meet the household water needs of New York City for 11 years.

And then came the current drought, which started in 2011, when suddenly the region’s groundwater was being pumped up at an estimated rate of nearly seven cubic kilometers per year. That’s the same amount of water that everyone in Texas uses at home annually. Jay Famiglietti, a senior water scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory who tracks groundwater depletion, points out that no one knows exactly how much water is left in the region’s aquifers—mainly because the state’s lax regulation means no one keeps track—but the current depletion rate has pushed the state “to the edge of a cliff,” he recently wrote. Meanwhile, several recent studies suggest that the West is actually in the early stages of a multidecade “megadrought.”

Experts worry that the combination of overpumping and drought could be catastrophic for the Central Valley, whose economy depends on being one of the world’s most productive farming areas. Richard Howitt, an agricultural economist at the University of California-Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, told me that he considers the situation “a slow-moving train wreck.”

You may think of almonds as the crunchy joy in your candy bar, the protein blast in your cereal. But to Wall Street, they have emerged as a white-hot global commodity—spawning a mini-gold-rush for the Central Valley, where more than 80 percent of the world’s almonds, as well as increasing percentages of pistachios and walnuts (43 percent and 28 percent, respectively), are grown.

Low in carbohydrates and high in monounsaturated fat and protein, these nuts are buoyed by a rising wave of nutritional consensus and diet fads (gluten-free, paleo, low-carb, etc.). In the United States, per capita almond consumption has jumped 225 percent since 2005—hitting two pounds per year and surpassing peanuts as America’s favorite nut. (Yes, botany sticklers, neither peanuts nor almonds are technically nuts; the former are legumes and the latter the seeds of drupes.) WhiteWave Foods (owner of the Silk brand) reports that US sales of its almond milk leapt 52 percent in the first quarter of 2014 compared to the previous year. Almond milk now makes up about two-thirds of the company’s total US faux-milk sales, trouncing even soy.

Our increasing fondness for nuts—along with a $28-million-a-year marketing campaign by the Almond Board of California—are part of what has prompted the almond boom. But the main driver comes from abroad. Nearly 70 percent of California’s almond crop is exported, with China the leading customer: Between 2007 and 2013, US almond exports to China and Hong Kong more than quadrupled, feeding a growing middle class’ appetite for high-protein, healthy food. Almonds now rank as the No. 1 US specialty crop export, beating wine by a count of $3.4 billion to $1.3 billion in 2012. (Walnuts and pistachios hold the third and fourth spots, each bringing in more than $1 billion in foreign sales.) As a result, wholesale almond prices jumped 78 percent between 2008 and 2012, even as production expanded 16 percent.

According to UC-Davis’ Howitt, the shift to almonds and other tree nuts is part of a long-term trend in California, the nation’s top agricultural state. Farmers in the Central Valley once grew mostly wheat and cattle. But over time, they have gravitated toward more-lucrative crops that take advantage of the region’s rare climate. “It’s a normal, natural process driven by market demand,” Howitt says. “We grow the stuff that people buy more of when they have more money.” Like nuts, which can replace low-margin products such as cotton, corn, or beef.

Family farms are reaping part of the almond windfall: According to the Almond Board of California, 72 percent of the state’s 6,500 almond farms are owned by families, and half are smaller than 50 acres. But massive financial interests—banks, pension funds, investment arms of insurance companies—are moving rapidly into the nut trade. Take TIAA-CREF, a New York-based retirement and investment fund with nearly a half-trillion dollars in total assets under management. The firm, which owns 37,000 acres of California farmland, claims to be one of the globe’s top five almond producers. On its website, TIAA-CREF says its California holdings produce more than 18 million pounds of almonds, or “enough to circle the world more than nine times.” In a report last year, the firm had one word for investors: nuts. It cited the rise of the nut-hungry Asian middle class and a global land base that’s “vanishing” because of urban sprawl, water scarcity, and environmental degradation. Almond orchards, said TIAA-CREF, were an “attractive long-term investment theme” with the potential to combine the steady income of bonds with the growth potential of stocks—a kind of investor’s holy grail.

Then there’s Hancock Agricultural Investment Group, a subsidiary of the sprawling Canadian insurance and financial services giant Manulife Financial. It manages $2.1 billion worth of farmland, mainly for large institutional investors like pension funds. Individuals can buy in—for a minimum investment of $5 million. HAIG owns at least 24,000 acres of almonds, pistachios, and walnuts, making it California’s second-largest nut grower. In a recent report to investors, HAIG reported that its nut holdings delivered more than 30 percent in total return (income from crop sales plus land appreciation) in 2013, far outpacing gains from its other crops like wine grapes, apples, cranberries, corn, and soybeans.

But the largest California nut grower of all is neither an insurance conglomerate nor (exactly) a family operation. Paramount Farms, owned by the Beverly Hills magnates Stewart and Lynda Resnick, has more than 70,000 acres of almonds and pistachios, and claims on its website to be the “world’s largest vertically integrated supplier” of those commodities, meaning that its operations control (and capture profits from) all the phases of production, from growing to processing and marketing. The power couple has also been adept at ensuring their nut and pomegranate plantations get plenty of surface water: They store it for dry years in the Kern Water Bank, a man-made, underground reservoir built by the state of California for public water storage. In an infamous deal in 1994, the Resnicks’ holding company gained a controlling interest in the water bank, making their nut groves less directly reliant on groundwater. Meanwhile, they’ve ramped up their campaign donations at the federal level, where lawmakers have a say in how much surface water—which, unlike groundwater, is highly regulated by both the federal and state governments—makes it into the Kern bank.

Having previously turned island water (Fiji) and pomegranate juice (Pom Wonderful) into ubiquitous products—and amassed a $3.8 billion fortune—the Resnicks have more recently turned their attention to pistachios, hiring the Korean rapper Psy and Stephen Colbert (“They’re wonderful. I’m wonderful…I think we’re done”) to pitch their Wonderful Pistachios brand.

According to Howitt, the flow of big money into almonds is a “rational response” to two broad economic factors: low interest rates, which make safe investments like bonds unattractive, and that ever-rising demand from China.

All summer long, the Central Valley is baking hot (100-plus-degree days are common) and dry as dust. Yet the valley ranks as one of the globe’s most productive farm landscapes, accounting for a third of US-grown fruits and vegetables. Making it bloom requires moving titanic amounts of water, mostly from snowmelt flowing down from the eastern mountain ranges and into California’s elaborate network of canals and aqueducts. Of this total—what the state refers to as “developed” water—agriculture uses about 80 percent, and almond groves suck up nearly 9 percent of that. That’s more than enough water, notes Carolee Krieger of the California Water Impact Network, to supply the yearly household needs of greater Los Angeles, San Diego, and the San Francisco Bay Area combined—around two-thirds of California’s population.

Even in good precipitation years, California agriculture has gotten so ravenous for surface water that the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, a critical engine of coastal biodiversity, stands at the edge of biological collapse. The state’s once-prolific salmon run, which depends on water making it all the way to the ocean, barely persists; more than 90 percent of marshes have been drained.

And when droughts hit, there’s not enough water to divert to agriculture either: Two major canal-and-pipeline systems that move water from the mountains to farmland—the federally run Central Valley Project and the California-run State Water Project—cut farmers off entirely for several months this year. While farmers can forgo annual crops like tomatoes and melons during droughts, failing to irrigate trees means losing the entire orchard. That leaves many nut and fruit farmers with only one option: groundwater. A recent UC-Davis study estimated that in the 2014 growing season, pumped-up groundwater will replace as much as 75 percent of the surface water that went missing due to the drought.

There’s a financial metaphor that helps to explain California’s dilemma. To live off surface water is to live off your paycheck. To rely on groundwater is to tap into your 401(k). Every draft you take is one that you won’t be able to replenish, at least not easily.

The water-drilling frenzy is worst in the San Joaquin Valley, which contains the great bulk of California’s almond and pistachio production. In most San Joaquin counties, the number of well permits nearly doubled between 2011 and 2013, an analysis of county records by the San Jose Mercury News found. This region is home to the epicenter of California’s nut juggernaut—Kern, Fresno, and Tulare counties, together known as the Tulare Basin. Kern and Fresno counties are by a wide margin the state’s leading almond producers, churning out 43 percent of California’s total harvest, or about one of every three almonds consumed on Earth.

The Almond Board of California likes to point out that almond production has become considerably less water-intensive as farmers have turned to drip irrigation and other methods for squeezing more crop from each drop. Gurreet Brar, the University of California Cooperative Extension almond specialist, tells me that the amount of water it takes to produce a pound of almonds has fallen by a third since 1990. But amped-up production has more than offset efficiency gains. As recently as 1995, California orchards were cranking out 370 million pounds of almonds a year. In 2013, they produced 2 billion pounds—a five-and-a-half-fold increase. Today, 80 percent of almonds consumed around the world, and about 40 percent of pistachios, come from California.

And land devoted to almonds just keeps growing, expanding by 20 percent between 2007 and 2013 and now reaching 940,000 acres, an area larger than Rhode Island. Pistachios are spreading at an even faster clip. Between 2005 and 2012, pistachio acreage jumped 75 percent.

Last summer, as orchards grew, the drought persisted, and the water tables dropped, the panicked California Legislature finally did something that agriculture interests had successfully fought back for a century: It took a baby step in the direction of groundwater regulation. Legislation passed in September orders the state’s watershed districts to create a framework for regulating groundwater—but the rules don’t go into effect for six years, and no one knows yet how effective they will be. They could take decades to make a difference, and they are still weaker than those of other Western states—for example, they don’t require a permitting process for new wells. Still, some farm groups—California’s Agricultural Council and Farm Bureau, along with nut growers and processors—were outraged by the new legislation and lobbied against it.

The day after my trip to Fresno, I’m making my way down dirt roads alongside irrigation ditches, into a stand of new pistachio trees planted in neat, monotonous rows nearly to the horizon: some nine square miles of scrawny saplings, connected by drip irrigation tubes. It’s like Iowa’s endless cornfields, but with nuts.

Deep inside the orchard, I come upon a three-man crew working on a massive well. A red crane towers 30 or so feet into the sky next to a stack of 20-foot metal pipes. The crew shoos us back, but my guide for the day, John Burchard, the soft-spoken, energetic octogenarian who manages the local municipal water supply, can tell they’re deepening a well.

A lanky man in dark dungarees, a long-sleeved blue work shirt, and a brown felt cowboy hat turned up sharply at the sides, Burchard has friendly eyes and a neatly trimmed white goatee. It’s his job to deliver safe water to the 1,026 residents of Alpaugh, a hardscrabble farmworker town in the heart of the parched Tulare Basin. Tulare County granted 831 well permits in 2013—more than any other county in the San Joaquin Valley, and twice as many as in 2011.

Alpaugh was once rich in water—in fact, it was an island, sitting in the middle of Tulare Lake, the biggest freshwater lake west of the Mississippi River before it was drained in the early 20th century to feed irrigation projects. Ever since, the lake-bottom land around it has been fertile farm country.

But these days, things are dire. Under a morning sun still cranking up to full fire, Burchard shows me one of the town’s two active wells. For years, Alpaugh got its tap water from here. But as the drought dragged on, Burchard found the water table dropping a stunning 10 feet per week. By May, the well became inoperable. “If we kept using it, we’d soon be pumping air,” he says.

So he had to switch to the town’s other well, which is 100 feet deeper. It taps a different part of the aquifer with higher levels of naturally occurring arsenic. Burchard’s first well was barely compliant with the EPA’s arsenic limit, 10 parts per billion. The water from the deeper well had 30 parts per billion.

Chronic low-level exposure to arsenic has been linked to heart disease and cancer; children and fetuses are particularly vulnerable. When the water from Burchard’s second well hit Alpaugh’s taps, the town warned residents about the arsenic. They now rely on bottled water, spending roughly $1,200 annually per household, or $400,000 for all residents put together—a huge burden in a town largely made up of low-wage farmworkers. “That’s more than our total budget,” says Burchard, noting that the entire town government has about $300,000 to spend on water. With an extra $400,000, Burchard says, he could filter out the arsenic—”I could send rose water” through the taps.

Across the valley, the pumping frenzy is causing severe strains. Jessi Snyder, a community development specialist with Central Valley-based Self-Help Enterprises, says that several other towns in Tulare County struggle with similar arsenic issues. More than 300 residents of East Porterville saw their wells simply dry up last August, forcing the county to send in emergency bottled-water rations.

Meanwhile, under a recent decree from Gov. Jerry Brown, Burchard says he has to impose “severe” water use restrictions on Alpaugh’s residents, as part of a statewide effort to combat the drought. People who already can’t drink the water will now face tough rules on when they can water their lawns and gardens. As he explains what he calls this “bitter irony,” I look around at the town’s low-slung modest houses with their small yards supporting patches of grass and the occasional fruit tree. Peach trees that supply fresh fruit to cash-strapped families face water restrictions while the vast nut orchards around them thrive. Of course, any water savings Burchard manages to wring out of residents will amount to a rounding error compared to the water going to agriculture. In his irrigation district, just 2 percent of water goes to homes. The other 98 percent goes to farms.

In some Central Valley towns, residents now rely on bottled water when their wells run dry due to demand from nearby nut orchards.

When will California’s nut boom end? Might some other country—say, China—just step in and put down massive plantings? Doubtful, says David Doll, an orchard adviser with the University of California Cooperative Extension. No other region has California’s combination of land, climate, infrastructure, and research support to supplant it as the globe’s almond king. “India and China have tried, and failed,” he says.

But an ongoing almond boom will bear ecological costs along with vast profits. As the water table drops from overpumping, the remaining water picks up higher concentrations of minerals from deep in the earth. When orchards are irrigated with such hard water, the salts build up in the soil, eventually killing the trees. In Fresno County, I saw entire groves of almond trees looking yellow and wan, signs of salt stress. The land around Alpaugh is already too salty to support almonds; that’s why the pistachio is the nut of choice there.

The new groundwater legislation won’t solve the problems—at least not any time soon. It takes a gradualist approach to an urgent problem—the state’s most water-stressed districts don’t have to submit sustainability plans until 2020, and then they have additional 20 years to prevent a “significant and unreasonable depletion of supply,” which isn’t clearly defined.

And the California Water Impact Network’s Krieger fears that corporate farms will hijack the process. She says that the special water districts that the legislation calls on to regulate water are prone to takeover by private interests—like what happened when the Resnicks gained a controlling interest in the Kern Water Bank. “The last thing California needs is the privatization of our groundwater,” she says.

On the other hand, California’s nut industry may need strong regulation to save itself from its own thirst. In a September note to investors, Brett Hundley, an agribusiness analyst for BB&T Capital Markets, wrote that “the long-term viability of the industry depends on effective regulation, given sustained declines in surface water availability.” That is, without regulation, tree farms will use up the very water they depend on.

For now, Doll expects that the almond expansion will continue apace, ending only “when the crop stops making money”—if China loses its appetite for nuts, or the wells finally run dry. Until then, though, the orchards will surely keep growing. After my morning in Alpaugh, I headed about 40 miles south and west through Tulare County toward Lost Hills, a company town that houses the main almond-processing plant of the Resnicks’ Paramount Farms.

This area was once home to King Cotton, and I still saw the occasional soft green field. But mostly, the roads were lined with almond and pistachio groves. For mile after mile, I sped past orchards, the bushy canopy studded with this year’s bumper crop, gleaming and golden in the midday sun.

See the original article here – 

Invasion of the Hedge Fund Almonds

Posted in alo, ATTRA, Casio, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Invasion of the Hedge Fund Almonds

Quote of the Day: American Health Care Is the Best in the World, Baby!

Mother Jones

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

From Douglas Coupland, after contracting bronchitis from a chilly hotel room in Atlanta:

Finally, I dragged myself to a local medical clinic, and this is when things got really American.

By “really American,” he means that he ended up being part of a scam that involved deliberately not treating him in order to get him hooked on oxycodone. No worries, though. The socialist Canadian health system eventually saved him.

Continue reading:

Quote of the Day: American Health Care Is the Best in the World, Baby!

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Quote of the Day: American Health Care Is the Best in the World, Baby!

Chart of the Day: Vaccinate Your Kids!

Mother Jones

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

Via the LA Times from a few months ago, here’s the rise in “personal belief” exemptions from state-mandated vaccinations among kindergartners in California:

And here’s where it’s happening:

In Los Angeles County, the rise in personal belief exemptions is most prominent in wealthy coastal and mountain communities, The Times analysis shows. The more than 150 schools with exemption rates of 8% or higher for at least one vaccine were located in census tracts where the incomes averaged $94,500 — nearly 60% higher than the county median.

….At Santa Cruz Montessori in the small coastal community of Aptos, about 7% of kindergartners in 2007 got belief exemptions. Last fall, that rate was 22.6%. Principal Kathy Rideout said the school has tried different approaches to encourage parents to immunize children. They asked a doctor to talk with fellow parents. They produced handouts emphasizing the importance of immunizations and asked parents seeking belief exemptions to get counseling from a healthcare practitioner. A state law that went into effect this year makes this a requirement. But none of it made much difference, Rideout said.

….“We have schools in California where the percent of children who exercise the personal belief exemption is well above 50%,” said Dr. Gil Chavez, deputy director of the California Department of Public Health’s Center for Infectious Diseases. “That’s going to be a challenge for any disease that is vaccine preventable.”

There are times when it’s appropriate to be skeptical of authority. This really isn’t one of them. “Big Vaccine” is not an issue in American life. Childhood vaccination is just a matter of public health that no one has any real motivation to lie about. Please don’t get sucked into this maelstrom. Get your kids vaccinated.

This article is from: 

Chart of the Day: Vaccinate Your Kids!

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Chart of the Day: Vaccinate Your Kids!

Rejoice! New York is the biggest city to ban foam packaging

Foam party

Rejoice! New York is the biggest city to ban foam packaging

By on 9 Jan 2015 3:56 pmcommentsShare

This week, New York officially became the largest city in the U.S. to ban that squeaky ecological scourge: plastic foam, usually (incorrectly) known as Styrofoam. The everlasting stuff is finally getting less ubiquitous now that it’s been kicked out of at least 70 cities across the country. (OK, yeah, they’re mostly located in California).

Groundswell

Former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg originally proposed the ban during a February 2013 State of the City address, but Mayor Bill de Blasio is seeing it through: If all goes as planned, it should roll out on July 1, preventing foam cups and containers and even packing peanuts from being sold in the Big Apple. (You’re still allowed to mail a package to New York full of foam peanuts, though.) Officials say it could eventually remove 30,000 tons of the stuff from streets and landfills and waterways.

Of course, the lobbying group Restaurant Action Alliance issued a statement in protest, saying that it’ll impose too significant of a financial hardship on small businesses and that New York should work on recycling the stuff instead. But guess what? It tried, and it can’t.

Plus, since New York is so huge, Sanitation Commissioner Kathryn Garcia has a good point: “Removing polystyrene from our waste stream is not only good for a greener, more sustainable New York,” she said, “but also for the communities who are home to landfills receiving the City’s trash.”

Right. Including that one really, really big community next door … you know, the ocean.

Source:
New York City to Ban Use of Plastic Foam Containers

, Huffington Post.

MAP: Which Cities Have Banned Plastic Foam?

, Groundswell.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

sponsored post

In 2015, make a New Year’s resolution that will actually change the world

How the power of positive energy turns you into a climate superhero.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Excerpt from:  

Rejoice! New York is the biggest city to ban foam packaging

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Rejoice! New York is the biggest city to ban foam packaging

Don’t panic! Fukushima radiation just hit the West Coast

Don’t panic! Fukushima radiation just hit the West Coast

By on 7 Jan 2015commentsShare

Nuclear energy gives plenty of people the heebie-jeebies: Like horror-movie ghosts and ancestral curses, you can’t see or feel or smell it, but it can still kill you. So when Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi plant was damaged in March 2011, releasing a flood of radioactive cesium-tinged water into the Pacific, nervous nancies the world over took note. And that note, typically, was: PANIC!!!!!1!!11!

First of all: No. Don’t. While some wafting fallout hit the U.S. in the first months after the disaster (results: TBD), ocean-borne radiation took the long way around to get to us. Specifically, 2.1 years, according to an analysis published last month in PNAS.

The study, conducted by scientists from the Bedford Institute of Oceanography, in Nova Scotia, monitored water at test sites off the coast of British Columbia. They were looking for atoms of cesium 134 and 137, the two molecules released at Fukushima — and, sure enough, eventually they found them. In June 2012, they found the smallest signs of the radiation only at their westernmost testing site; a year later, the signal made it to the Canadian continental shelf, but still far offshore. Then, in November 2014, a group from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution found traces of Fukushima radiation 100 miles off California. 

To reiterate: Don’t panic. By the time it made it to this side of the Pacific, that radiation was 10 million times weaker than it was when it left Japan, and 1,000 times below the safe threshold for drinking water (for nerds: We’re talking under 2 Becquerels per cubic meter [260 gallons]). In fact, that’s even lower than the background radiation levels in the ocean, where residual cesium 137 still lurks from atmospheric nuclear testing in the past 50 years. According to WHOI scientist Thomas Buesseler as cited by Quartz, you could swim in that water for six hours a day, every day, and still absorb less radiation than you would from a single dental x-ray.

None of which is to say that a nuclear power plant still hemorrhaging toxic waste into the ocean is NBD. There are real concerns about the fishing industry in Japan, where ecosystems continue to be dosed with the irradiated water, and some concerns about Pacific tuna, which may be vulnerable thanks to their epic migratory patterns.

Did I mention not to panic? Even though you are not likely to turn into a three-eyed mutant thanks to minute amounts of ambient radiation, the Fukushima disaster raises interesting questions about what we know about our interconnected world — and I’m not just talking about Twitter. How, exactly, does an event in one part of the world ripple outward? Scientists have models of Pacific currents, but, given the vastness of the ocean and the confounding number of variables, nothing beats old-fashioned observation. The Fukushima radiation serves as a kind of dye test, showing exactly how water from a single release point traverses the ocean.

And, in fact, the computer models turn out to be pretty accurate. Since irradiated water has continued to leak from the damaged reactors in the past three years, radiation levels will continue to rise, peaking in Canada in 2015 and 2016 and a few years later in Southern California. But — once and for all, drop the adrenaline and iodine tablets, you’re fine — the levels are never expected to exceed the very-safe limit of 5 Becquerels per cubic meter. Now you can go back to panicking about the very real threat of global warming instead.

Source:
Tracking the Fukushima radioactivity plume across the Pacific

, L.A. Times.

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

Read original article: 

Don’t panic! Fukushima radiation just hit the West Coast

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Don’t panic! Fukushima radiation just hit the West Coast

California Gov. Jerry Brown gets more ambitious about tackling climate change

California Gov. Jerry Brown gets more ambitious about tackling climate change

By on 6 Jan 2015commentsShare

California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) wants to make his state even more of a climate leader during his fourth and final term. In a wide-ranging inaugural speech yesterday, he laid out plans to go out with a bang.

He quoted E.O. Wilson — “Surely one moral precept we can agree on is to stop destroying our birthplace, the only home humanity will ever have” — and then called for California to pursue ambitious climate goals for 2030 that build on those the state has already laid out for 2020. Brown said that California’s “impressive” 2020 goals, which the state is “on track to meet,” still “are not enough” for California to lead the world on the path to containing climate change to 2 degrees Celsius of warming, a target that the U.N. hopes will keep the worst effects in check.

From The New York Times, an overview of Brown’s new plans:

Gov. Jerry Brown began his fourth and final term on Monday proposing a broad reduction in California’s energy consumption over the next 15 years — including a call to slash gas consumption by cars and trucks by as much as 50 percent — as part of what he said would be a sweeping campaign to heighten the state’s role in the fight against global warming.

Mr. Brown, a longtime champion of electric cars and limiting greenhouse gas emissions, called in his inauguration speech for 50 percent of California’s electricity to come from renewable energy sources by 2030, up from the current goal of one-third by 2020, and doubling the energy efficiency of existing buildings.

Mr. Brown was in effect proposing that California, which is already viewed as at the forefront in the battle to curb emissions, greatly expand cutbacks put in place in the state’s landmark 2006 greenhouse gas emission bills. And he made clear that he would use his final years in office to try to make this happen.

Brown’s time in office has seen tremendous pushback from the fossil-fuel industry, which has opposed implementation of the state’s cap-and-trade program, put in place by that landmark 2006 climate bill, and other measures. The political money battle will likely only intensify now that Brown’s environmental initiatives are more ambitious, with Brown’s own well-heeled allies — notably environmentalist-billionaire Tom Steyer, who was present at the state Capitol for Brown’s speech — pushing back.

The Western States Petroleum Association, one of the primary industry lobbying groups active in California, told the Associated Press that it was reviewing Brown’s proposals.

Environmental groups, on the other hand, told the AP that Brown should have gone still further — they want the governor to ban fracking in the state during his final term.

Source:
Gov. Jerry Brown Begins Last Term With a Bold Energy Plan

, The New York Times.

Jerry Brown seeks new green regulations in historic fourth term

, Los Angeles Times.

California governor toughens climate-change goals

, Associated Press.

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

Excerpt from – 

California Gov. Jerry Brown gets more ambitious about tackling climate change

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on California Gov. Jerry Brown gets more ambitious about tackling climate change

Boxing Day Cat Blogging – 26 December 2014

Mother Jones

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

Traditionally, Boxing Day is when the upper classes present the help with Christmas boxes full of money or gifts. As you might guess, this tradition has been corrupted a bit on its way to California. Here, it’s the day that the help presents the upper classes with a box. Empty is preferred, actually. This one is big enough for two cats, but Hopper isn’t interested in lounging inside the box. She leaves that to Hilbert. She prefers to sit on the outside and gnaw on the box instead. Her motto: If it’s cellulose-based, it’s meant to be ripped to shreds.

View article: 

Boxing Day Cat Blogging – 26 December 2014

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Boxing Day Cat Blogging – 26 December 2014

What Are the Odds Your City Will Have a White Christmas?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
The lighter the shade of blue, the higher the chance of a White Christmas. NOAA/NCDC

This story originally appeared in CityLab and is published here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Those determined to have a White Christmas should grab crampons and a bottle of scotch and prepare for a tough slog. Many places in the lower 48 with a lock on holiday snow are located in rugged, altitudinous climes—the bony ridge of the Sierra Nevada, for instance, and the wind-burned peaks of the Rockies.

That much is clear in this delightful NOAA map plotting probabilities across the US for a White Christmas, defined here as a December 25 with more than an inch of snow on the ground. Based on three decades of climate normals from the National Climatic Data Center, the graphic shows a stark geographic divide when it comes to unwrapping presents in snow-globe conditions: A region of zero to 10 percent probability curves from Washington State through coastal California and then explodes in the deep South and Southeast. Parts of the Midwest also are likely to be snowless, with places like Kansas, Missouri, and lower Illinois having only an 11 to 25 percent chance of a White Christmas.

New York, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C., have piddling shots at this charming weather, though their brethren higher on the East Coast fare better: Boston and Providence each have a 41 to 50 percent chance. Chicago racks a (considering its frosty reputation) low-sounding 41 to 50 percent chance, and Buffalo, home to sudden crashing currents of lake-effect snow, takes it up to 51 to 60 percent.

Aside from the West’s mountain ranges, NOAA says the best-performing powder points for December 25 are Maine, upstate New York, Minnesota, the highlands of West Virginia and Pennsylvania, and almost “anywhere in Idaho.” But even these crystal-crusted locales could shake off the holiday snow this year, the agency says: “While the map shows the climatological probability that a snow depth of at least one inch will be observed on December 25, the actual conditions this year may vary widely from these probabilities because the weather patterns present will determine the snow on the ground or snowfall on Christmas day.”

Here’s another version of the map that’s less smooth, but clearer at delineating regional probabilities:

NOAA/NCDC

View the original here:

What Are the Odds Your City Will Have a White Christmas?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, The Atlantic, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What Are the Odds Your City Will Have a White Christmas?