Tag Archives: director

How to Run Faster

Mother Jones

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

If you want to become a better runner, the obvious answer is to run more. Practice, practice, practice. Well, maybe not. It turns out that more time laced up, running longer distances, may not be the best way to improve. These days, many athletes are ditching long runs for interval training—and for good reason. Pushing the human body to maximum capacity, for shorter amounts of time, forces it to adapt quickly and could even change its physiology in the process.

Interval training helps the cardiovascular system by improving the body’s ability to use oxygen and insulin. It makes arteries more elastic than slower-paced exercise does, and some say it helps burn belly-fat. It isn’t just for athletes: Scientists in Denmark have found that patients with Type 2 Diabetes who did intervals of intense walking had enhanced fitness and better blood-glucose levels compared to a control group that walked at a moderate pace for an extended period of time.

If you’re not one for getting sweaty, running isn’t unlike the many other hobbies at which you might be desperate to improve. There’s tons of emerging science that can help show you how to get better—and that explains what separates the good from the best. On this week’s episode of the Inquiring Minds podcast, musician and neuroscientist Indre Viskontas talks with Swedish psychologist Anders Ericsson about what it takes to become great. You can listen below:

If you’re familiar with the 10,000-hour theory from Malcolm Gladwell’s book Outliers, you may have heard of Ericsson’s work. Gladwell argued that we can become experts at a sport, musical instrument, or hobby in part by logging more than 10,000 hours doing it. Ericsson, who says Gladwell “misinterpreted” some of his work, argues that it’s not merely time that’s important. He points to what’s called “deliberate practice“—putting mindfulness into our chord progressions, tennis back swings, or Spanish vocabulary review—as one of the keys to becoming an expert. People often mistake the results of deliberate practice for raw talent, Ericsson says.

“It’s the belief that people are born with this thing, and it’s their job to find it,” he says. “We are arguing that you need to build it.”

In Ericsson’s new book, Peak: Secrets from the New Science of Expertiseco-authored with Robert Poolhe argues that becoming great at an activity is not about practicing hard enough to fulfill one’s potential, but practicing well enough to maintain motivation. And as for the willpower supposedly needed to become an expert? Ericsson balks at that idea and instead says that experts produce a continued enjoyment in their playing or performance, which leads them engage in yet more deliberate practice. So in short: If you don’t like what you are doing, you’ll probably have trouble becoming great at it.

There’s another habit that Ericsson says is helpful for improving performance: rest. In the early 1990’s, he and his team found that elite violinists slept an hour more each night than average ones—and they frequently took naps, as well. So as you strive for greatness, you might want to consider spending a little less time practicing and a bit more time sleeping. Are you listening, Donald Trump?

Inquiring Minds is a podcast hosted by neuroscientist and musician Indre Viskontas and Kishore Hari, the director of the Bay Area Science Festival. To catch future shows right when they are released, subscribe to Inquiring Minds via iTunes or RSS. You can follow the show on Twitter at @inquiringshow, like us on Facebook, and check out show notes and other cool stuff on Tumblr.

Read more:  

How to Run Faster

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How to Run Faster

Congressional Committee Says We Should Draft Women

Mother Jones

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

Last year, the Pentagon announced that women would be allowed to join men in front-line combat positions in the military for the first time. This year, women may also have to join men in registering for the draft.

The House Armed Services Committee narrowly passed an amendment to the 2017 defense spending bill on Wednesday that would require women to register with the Selective Service System, the federal agency that administers military drafts. A draft hasn’t been held since the Vietnam war, but all American men between the ages of 18 and 25 are still required to register. Some members of Congress now want women to share the burden.

“If we want equality in this country, if we want women to be treated precisely like men are treated and that they should not be discriminated against, then we should support a universal conscription,” said Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), according to The Hill. The Army and Marine Corps’ top generals have already endorsed making women register. Most countries that draft soldiers only do so for men, but a handful, including Norway and Israel, also conscript women.

The amendment, introduced by former Marine officer Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), essentially backfired for him. In fact, Hunter does not support drafting women or allowing them to serve in jobs like the infantry, but has said that Congress should debate the issue of women in combat instead of allowing the Obama administration to simply change the military’s regulations. This amendment was his attempt to push the issue to the limits and thereby dissuade others from supporting putting women on the front lines. “The draft is there to get more people to rip the enemy’s throats out,” Hunter said. “I don’t want to see my daughters put in a place where they have to get drafted.”

Other members want to do away with draft registration altogether, saying a volunteer military is more effective. “The bar would have to be dramatically lowered if we were to return to conscription again,” said Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), according to the Washington Post. Coffman co-sponsored a bill introduced in February that would end Selective Service altogether. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), who also sponsored the bill to end selective service, argues the draft also needlessly punishes those who don’t register by cutting them off from federal aid and jobs. “It’s mean-spirited, stupid, unnecessary, and a huge waste of taxpayer money,” DeFazio told Mother Jones.

The Selective Service System currently costs about $23 million dollars per year. Lawrence Romo, the director of the Selective Service System, estimates the agency would require another $8 million per year if women were included in the draft.

Link:  

Congressional Committee Says We Should Draft Women

Posted in Anchor, Casio, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Congressional Committee Says We Should Draft Women

6 years after BP disaster, Obama administration thinks it has a way to prevent future spills

6 years after BP disaster, Obama administration thinks it has a way to prevent future spills

By on 14 Apr 2016commentsShare

Next Wednesday marks the sixth anniversary of the Deepwater Horizon spill, the BP gusher that killed 11 workers and released at least 4 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. On Thursday, the Obama administration finalized a set of regulations that will help ensure we never have to witness this kind of disaster again — or so the administration claims. But environmental experts have real concerns about the rule’s rigor and implementation.

The new rule — the result of years of investigations by the Department of Interior, the Department of Homeland Security, and the National Academy of Engineering — will tighten standards for blowout preventers (the type of device that failed spectacularly in 2010). It will also strengthen the design of other offshore well elements, including wellheads and the steel casings used in construction.

Speaking to press on Thursday, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell cited the complexity of oil drilling technology as one of the reasons why the regulations took six years to compose. And learning from the blowout was a part of taking time “to do this right,” she said.

“As offshore oil and gas production continue to grow every year and our dependence on foreign oil continues to decline, we owe it to the American people to ensure we are developing these resources responsibly and safely,” said Jewell, who was once a petroleum engineer in Oklahoma.

Asked point blank on a press call if the blowout preventers will be fail-safe, Brian Salerno, director of the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, said he couldn’t give a conclusive answer. “We do believe this is a significant increase in the level of safety,” he said.

The new regulations incorporate several existing industry standards, produced by the likes of the American Petroleum Institute. API’s reaction to the announcement has been relatively calm.

But environmentalists have found much more to criticize.

A major concern is how rigorous the rule is around severing capability, the ability of blowout preventers to seal a pipe or wellbore by cutting through the pipe or casing in the event of a leak.

Liz Birnbaum, former director of the Minerals Management Service and an expert in offshore energy development, also pointed to the long phase-in periods that appear in the proposed regulations. “The rule says that they have three more years to set up real-time monitoring [of oil-well safety by onshore personnel],” Birnbaum told Grist. “Which is just insane.” She pointed to the fact that BP was able to set up real-time monitoring in less time than that after the Deepwater Horizon spill. “It doesn’t take three years.”

Environmental groups worry about providing too much flexibility for industry players, too. The only solution, Director of Environment America’s Stop Drilling Program Rachel Richardson said, “is to transition away from dirty fuels altogether.”

With respect to blowout preventers, Birnbaum argues that industry is being given too much temporal wiggle room to update their technology. In drilling operations, companies aren’t currently required to install parts that center the drill pipe during severing operations — which was exactly the problem during the Deepwater Horizon spill. The regulations would require them to do so, but not for another seven years.

Before the seven years are up, the Gulf of Mexico may be open for another 10 offshore leases, based on Obama’s proposed five-year offshore drilling plan. According to Birnbaum, “Another seven years is seven years too long.”

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

More:

6 years after BP disaster, Obama administration thinks it has a way to prevent future spills

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 6 years after BP disaster, Obama administration thinks it has a way to prevent future spills

Yet More Obama Tyranny Turns Out to Be Pretty Non-Tyrannical

Mother Jones

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

Stanley Kurtz is yet again in a lather about a HUD program called Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, the centerpiece of President Obama’s plan to fight housing discrimination:

Federal Tyranny Gags GOP in Hillary’s Backyard

The Obama administration’s AFFH policy has morphed from “mere” massive regulatory overreach into a bald attempt to quash the freedom of speech of its political opponents. The new federal effort to muzzle Westchester County Executive Robert Astorino’s attacks on the Obama administration’s housing policy is very arguably designed to silence public opposition to AFFH, and to remove a potential political time-bomb from Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Hillary Clinton’s hometown of Chappaqua, in Westchester County, New York is ground zero in the national controversy over AFFH….And now it just so happens that the “Federal Monitor” appointed to oversee the settlement of a court case compelling Westchester to “affirmatively further fair housing” has asked a court to muzzle Astorino.

But here’s a funny thing: Westchester’s problems were caused by a private lawsuit filed in 2006, which it lost in February 2009. It hardly seems likely that Obama had much to do with that. And it seems doubly unlikely that AFFH, which was announced a mere nine months ago, could possibly be “ground zero” for a fight that’s been ongoing for over a decade.

Still, I suppose those are nits. Regardless of when it all started, it’s certainly outrageous for the feds to try to gag an opponent of their policies. This is the kind of thing that—

What’s that? Maybe I should take a look at the federal monitor’s actual court filing? How tiresome. But we’re professionals around here. Let’s see now…ah, here it is on page 55: “Recommended Remedies.” This is what the monitor wants:

a Court declaration reemphasizing the essential terms of the Settlement and issuing findings making clear that none of the terms have been changed and the County’s statements analyzed in Section II of this report are false;
distribution by the County, voluntarily or by order, of the declaration and findings described above to the leadership of all of the eligible communities;
posting the declaration and findings described above prominently on the County website and the removal of press releases inconsistent with the declaration and findings;
unsealing the videotapes of the depositions of, at the least, the County Executive, the Commissioner of Planning, and the Director of Communications, inasmuch as each made or reviewed unsupported public statements that were inconsistent with both the terms of the Settlement and their own sworn testimony; and
hiring, within 30 days of the issuance of this report, a public communications consultant that will craft a message and implement a strategy sufficiently robust to provide information broadly to the public that describes the benefits of integration, as required by Paragraph 33(c)….

Basically, Westchester is under court order to do certain things. They haven’t done them. In fact, county leaders have been loudly and habitually lying about both the consent decree and HUD’s affordable housing requirements for years. So now the monitor wants (a) the actual terms of the settlement to be widely distributed, (b) depositions to be unsealed so everyone can see what county leaders have been saying under oath, and (c) a third-party consultant to craft the court-ordered PR plan, since the county plainly has no intention of obeying the consent decree on its own.

But nobody is being muzzled. As near as I can tell, Astorino can continue saying anything he wants. However, the county, in its official capacity as an arm of the government, is required to carry out the consent decree. In the face of repeated intransigence, the federal monitor is asking the court to force it to do just that.

I like reading The Corner. It’s a good place to get a lot of different conservative opinions on the headlines of the day. But there are a few bylines I routinely skip because the authors are basically unhinged. Kurtz is one of them. Among other things, he was part of the crowd that went bananas about Bill Ayers during the 2008 campaign, and he’s been flogging Obama’s “war on the suburbs” for years. Today’s post is just the latest installment.

Anyway: No muzzling. No gagging. No tyranny. Just a county that refuses to obey a court order and a federal monitor who wants a judge to push harder on them. It’s hard to think of anything more routine.

Excerpt from:  

Yet More Obama Tyranny Turns Out to Be Pretty Non-Tyrannical

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yet More Obama Tyranny Turns Out to Be Pretty Non-Tyrannical

Obama’s offshore drilling plan mostly a win for environmentalists, with a caveat

Obama’s offshore drilling plan mostly a win for environmentalists, with a caveat

By on 15 Mar 2016commentsShare

President Obama has shown little interest in gambling his environmental legacy in his final year of office. Rather than slow down after the Paris climate change conference in December, he has pushed forward on policies climate activists say are necessary to keep fossil fuels in the ground — first, his administration announced a moratorium on new coal leases, and now, it has taken the Atlantic Coast off the table for drillers.

The administration released a new version of its five-year plan for offshore drilling on Tuesday, and the most significant change is its reversal on its plan from a year ago to open the mid-Atlantic to offshore development. The Arctic, meanwhile, is still open for business: The new proposal solicits comments on whether to drop Arctic leases entirely or whether to limit them in some areas. But it also still has an option that includes leases in the Chuckhi Sea, Beaufort Sea, and Cook Inlet — much criticized by environmentalists who say a spill anywhere in the Arctic will have devastating effects for the rest of the region. The Gulf will be open for 10 leases.

The Interior Department’s plan for offshore drilling essentially sets the course for oil and gas development long after Obama leaves office. Technically it covers a period from 2017 to 2022, but oil and gas exploration offshore can take years to get off the ground, even decades before paying off the cost. Any delay is promising: While presidential candidates could promise to reverse course, in practice, they are unlikely to do so, explained Natural Resources Defense Council’s Beyond Oil Director Franz Matzner. “This administration sets the five-year plan for the next administration,” Matzner said in an email. “The next administration could, in theory, try to undo that, but we have not seen that precedent in the past. Far and away the most secure route for the Obama administration would be to permanently withdraw the Arctic and Atlantic from all future leasing, using his executive authority under [the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act].”

Advertisement – Article continues below

If the proposed version is finalized after the 90 days of public comment, it will be a significant achievement for environmentalists and local communities that organized against offshore drilling. With one caveat, of course: the Arctic.

“They won’t get it right every time, but it gives us a new hook to hold them and the next president to account,” 350.org spokesperson Jamie Henn said in an email. “The new test of climate leadership is if you’re keeping fossil fuels in the ground.”

“Less than a week after committing to protect the Arctic with Prime Minister Trudeau, President Obama has left the door open for Shell and the rest of the oil industry to drill in the region,” Greenpeace USA Executive Director Annie Leonard said in an email. “This decision doesn’t balance conservation and energy — it fuels climate chaos. President Obama must place the whole Arctic off limits. This program isn’t yet final, the president must use the time he has to take all new offshore drilling out of circulation.”

The Interior didn’t highlight climate change as part of its calculus on Tuesday, only citing “significant potential conflicts with other ocean uses such as the Department of Defense and commercial interests; current market dynamics; limited infrastructure; and opposition from many coastal communities.” But there was intense pressure from cities and businesses that rely on $4 billion in tourism and fishing on the coasts to remove the Atlantic from the plan. In recent weeks, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have highlighted their opposition against drilling off the East Coast and the Arctic.

This is the second time the administration has tried to open the East Coast for drilling, only to reverse course. Just before the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster by BP, the administration proposed auctioning up to 104 million acres of the mid- and south-Atlantic and 10 leases in the Arctic. Then last January, Interior again put the Atlantic on the table, which set off protests from environmental groups and local businesses and residents.

The oil and gas industry, which eyed the Atlantic for its 3.3 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 31.3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, will be furious. But public opinion on oil drilling is more complicated than political divides. Public support for offshore drilling plummets when there are spills, as it did after the BP disaster in 2010, but tends to rise again with passing time.

In his final year of office, Obama faces limits in what more he can do for the environment and climate. He’s already pushed his executive power on climate change more than any other president; the offshore drilling plan is one of the few opportunities he has left. Protecting the coasts by limiting oil and gas development offshore would be a fitting ending for a president who once called the BP spill the “worst environmental disaster America has ever faced.”

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

See the original post – 

Obama’s offshore drilling plan mostly a win for environmentalists, with a caveat

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Radius, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama’s offshore drilling plan mostly a win for environmentalists, with a caveat

All Trump-ed out, Chris Christie goes home to block funding for lead-poisoned families

All Trump-ed out, Chris Christie goes home to block funding for lead-poisoned families

By on 7 Mar 2016commentsShare

Chris Christie’s bad month keeps getting worse: he dropped out of the presidential race after an abysmal finish in New Hampshire, he endorsed Donald Trump to the Republican establishment’s revulsion, and six of his home-state newspapers called on him to resign. You’d think that, at this point, the New Jersey governor’s parade of missteps would be over.

But lo and behold, Christie can’t help himself. This week, he’s back home, spending his time blocking Democratic legislators’ efforts to clean up high levels of lead in New Jersey cities.

On Monday, New Jersey’s legislature reviewed two bills meant to alleviate lead poisoning, which affects children’s development, by funneling $10 million into the state’s Lead Hazard Control Assistance Fund, which would provide financial aid to homeowners who wanted to safely remove lead paint and earmark money to relocate families whose children have high lead levels. The fund has spent $16.5 million since its creation in 2004, based off a  50-cent-per-gallon fee on paint sales. The newly proposed bill would obtain funding through this fee.

Advertisement – Article continues below

Christie has opposed efforts to earmark funding in the state’s budget in the past, vetoing another version of the same bill in January. It was the third year in a row that the bill has failed to make it through. The last time Christie vetoed it, Director of the New Jersey Sierra Club Jeff Tittel said the move was akin to “stealing money that would keep lead out of our homes and protect our children from lead poisoning.”

“First of all this has been an over-dramatized issue,” Christie told reporters last Thursday, according to NJ Spotlight. His reasoning: “You cannot fund everything. So make some choices and I will certainly be willing to consider that along with everything else that comes about.”

Christie’s argument is that New Jersey has seen success with reducing lead poisoning, with the number of children with unsafe levels of lead dropping by 70 percent from 1997 to 2013. He also argues that the state funds existing lead programs — after Superstorm Sandy, New Jersey earmarked $7 million a year for lead abatement, and receives $5 million in federal funding to fix damaged properties yearly. But the bill’s advocates say that more funding is needed. Due to the Centers for Disease Control stricter limit on what level of lead in children’s blood is considered “safe,” the number of children in New Jersey considered to have an unsafe level of lead in their blood jumped from 800 children in 2012 to more than 5,000 in 2013.

Lead poisoning has been a national topic the past few months, after Flint’s 100,000 residents found a high concentration of lead in their water supply. Most lead poisoning comes from contaminated water sources, soil in places where cars relied on lead-based gasoline, and, more rarely, from consuming or inhaling lead-based paint particles. Flint isn’t the only place with a lead problem, either. Across the country, nine counties report that 10 percent or more of their population tested positive for lead poisoning, according to 2014 CDC data. Research by public health advocacy groups show that 11 New Jersey cities and two counties have higher lead levels than those in Flint, Michigan.

Though he’s now stumping for Trump, Christie may have more something in common with another one of his one-time presidential opponents. At the most recent Republican debate last week, Florida Senator Marco Rubio said that Flint’s water crisis a tragedy, yet still defended Michigan Governor Rick Snyder. “The politicizing of it, I think, is unfair, because I don’t think someone woke up one morning and said “let’s figure out how to poison the water system to hurt someone, but accountability is important,” Rubio said.

Snyder agrees:

But it shouldn’t come as a surprise that Christie is following in-step with other Republican politicians — after all, it’s clear that at this point, he’ll follow anyone into hell.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

View original:  

All Trump-ed out, Chris Christie goes home to block funding for lead-poisoned families

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, Radius, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on All Trump-ed out, Chris Christie goes home to block funding for lead-poisoned families

Coal use is down in the U.S. and China — and it’s not a blip

People wear protective masks near the Bund during a polluted day in Shanghai. Reuters/Aly Song

Coal use is down in the U.S. and China — and it’s not a blip

By on 29 Feb 2016commentsShare

China and the U.S. — the world’s two largest economies — are finally breaking up with coal.

China’s National Bureau of Statistics reports that coal consumption dropped in 2015, for the second time in two years, by 3.7 percent. That’s even faster than coal’s decline the year before, when consumption fell 2.9 percent. China’s carbon pollution has also declined by 1 to 2 percent since 2014, due in part to a slowing economy and the decline in cement and steel production.

Put another way, the “fall in coal use over past two years was equal to Japan’s total yearly coal consumption,” says Greenpeace (Japan is heavily reliant on coal itself).

Advertisement

This likely isn’t a two-year blip: China plans to close more than 1,000 coal mines in 2016 and has halted approval for new coal mines for the next three years as part of its new front in the battle with air pollution. Its renewable energy industry, meanwhile, is expanding at an astounding rate. The country’s wind and solar capacity increased 34 and 74 percent respectively, which met the country’s growing electricity demand.

Before you get too excited about this rare good news for climate change, there’s one big disclaimer: We know that China’s reporting of emissions data isn’t always accurate; last November, we learned that Chinese officials had underreported 2012 emissions data.

But if these numbers are indeed accurate, it’s no small feat for fighting climate change. China is responsible for half of the world’s coal consumption. Meanwhile, the U.S. is also cutting coal in the power sector much faster than expected.

According to a February report from the Business Council on Sustainable Energy, coal accounted for just over a third of U.S. electricity sources in 2015, at 34 percent. At it’s peak in 2005, the industry accounted for 50 percent of the electricity sector. The precipitous drop in coal use — which hit a 35-year monthly low last November — puts the U.S. halfway to the Obama administration’s goal of cutting carbon emissions from the power sector by one-third over 2005 levels.

Even if coal is on the way out — an outcome most of the world agreed is necessary when it adopted the United Nations Paris climate agreement in December — the question is whether it’s happening fast enough. China promised to reach peak carbon emissions around 2030, but signs suggest that date may come much earlier.

“Nowadays people are talking about, ‘Wait a second, maybe the coal peak already happened in 2013,’” Director of the Brookings-Tsinghua Center for Public Policy Qi Ye told Foreign Policy last year. Last fall, Goldman Sachs promised that, on the global scale, “Peak coal is coming sooner than expected.”

That said, most breakups have some bumps along the way — coal included. There have been been mixed developments on coal and greenhouse gas emissions around the world since the Paris summit: European Union now looks like it may overshoot its earlier emissions targets, while Australia’s carbon emissions are back on the rise after the repeal of its carbon tax.

The road to coal’s demise will certainly be long and fraught, but at least we have an idea now that it’s headed in the right direction.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.Climate on the Mind

A Grist Special Series

Get Grist in your inbox

Source:  

Coal use is down in the U.S. and China — and it’s not a blip

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, sustainable energy, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Coal use is down in the U.S. and China — and it’s not a blip

French Government Nearing Decision About Whether to Ban Climate Protests

We’ll know Wednesday or Thursday whether or not the big climate march in Paris will go ahead. A memorial for the victims killed in Friday’s attacks in Paris in front of the French Embassy in Berlin. Markus Schreiber/AP We learned yesterday that even after Friday’s terrorist attacks that killed 129 people in Paris, global warming activists are pushing to go ahead with large protests and civil disobedience in the French capital two weeks from now. On Tuesday morning, Paris time, representatives of a coalition of 130 environmental groups met with French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius to argue that the rallies should be allowed to take place alongside the upcoming UN climate summit—and to hear the government’s security concerns. The climate negotiations “cannot take place without the participation or without the mobilizations of civil society in France,” read a statement released yesterday by Coalition Climat 21, an umbrella group of activists. But even after the meeting this morning, there remains plenty of doubt about which events will be canceled and which will be permitted to take place. Paris remains under a state of emergency, and French President Francois Hollande has said parliament should extend that state of emergency for another three months. Jamie Henn, a spokesperson for the US-based environmental group 350.org, told me Tuesday morning that the French authorities are nearing a decision on the main climate march, which had been scheduled to take place in the streets of Paris on November 29, the evening before the summit opens. That permitting decision, he says, should come from the French government either Wednesday or Thursday. “The coalition is pushing hard for it to move forward if safety can be maintained,” Henn said. Organizers had expected to draw around 200,000 to the rally, according to Reuters. Coordinated climate rallies in cities around the world are expected to continue. “We’re still waiting for the French authorities to tell us if they think the march in Paris, and other mobilization moments around the climate talks, can be made safe and secure,” said Jean-François Julliard, Executive Director for Greenpeace in France, according to a statement. “Huge numbers are predicted for the Paris gathering. We at Greenpeace want it to happen.” But additional protests in Paris, such as plans to block roads and form human chains at the Place de la République, scheduled for December 12, “are still under negotiation,” Henn said. While security officials are still mulling the big November 29 March, activists say that French authorities have been pressuring them to cancel the more aggressive actions planned for the end of the summit. Those December 12 events were “always planned as civil disobedience and never had permission, so it’s not really a matter of the government banning it or not,” Henn said. “But the French authorities have made it clear they don’t want it to go forward.” Despite that, says Henn, “we’re committed to finding a way to make a strong call for climate justice at the end.” One thing we do know: The large exhibition pavilion set up by the UN at the site of the summit for environmental groups, observers, and the general public—called the Climate Generations space—will be maintained, “but maybe with new access rules,” Henn said. This post has been updated with more specific details about the December 12 protests. Excerpt from –  French Government Nearing Decision About Whether to Ban Climate Protests ; ; ;

Read the article: 

French Government Nearing Decision About Whether to Ban Climate Protests

Posted in alo, bamboo, Citadel, Create Space, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, global climate change, Monterey, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on French Government Nearing Decision About Whether to Ban Climate Protests

Bernie Sanders: Yes, Climate Change Is Still Our Biggest National Security Threat

Mother Jones

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

Bernie Sanders opened Saturday night’s Democratic debate by vowing to rid the world of ISIS, the terrorist organization that claimed responsibility for killing more than 100 people in Paris Friday. In a follow-up question, moderator John Dickerson pointed out that during a debate last month, Sanders had identified “climate change” as the greatest threat to national security. “Do you still believe that?” asked Dickerson.

“Absolutely,” replied Sanders. He added that “of course international terrorism is a major issue that we have got to address today,” but argued that “climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism.” Sanders warned that global warming could cause international conflicts “over limited amounts of water, limited amounts of land to…grow crops.” You can watch the full exchange above.

Sanders isn’t alone in arguing that climate change has the potential to make international conflicts worse. According to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, “Extreme weather, climate change, and public policies that affect food and water supplies will probably create or exacerbate humanitarian crises and instability risks.” The Department of Defense says that climate change “poses immediate risks to US national security” and has the potential to exacerbate terrorism. There’s also substantial evidence that drought linked to climate change helped spark Syria’s civil war.

Source: 

Bernie Sanders: Yes, Climate Change Is Still Our Biggest National Security Threat

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bernie Sanders: Yes, Climate Change Is Still Our Biggest National Security Threat

Let’s Just Blame China for Everything and Call It a Day

Mother Jones

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

This cracks me up. A few minutes ago Wolf Blitzer brought on Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the Homeland Security committee, and asked him a question about WikiLeaks getting hold of CIA Director John Brennan’s private email account. McCaul nattered on for a bit about the OPM breach a few months ago, and then said this:

McCaul: I wouldn’t be surprised if China was behind this one.

Blitzer: Behind this one? Because it seems like this hacker claims to be under 22 McCaul starts to appear a bit puzzled and deep in thought a young kid who’s stoned all the time. You think that—

McCaul: Oh yeah yeah yeah, I apologize, you’re correct about that. This was a young, sort of anonymous type figure, that did claim to be stoned at the time he did that, which is remarkable given what he accomplished.

Two things. First, do you notice how McCaul just sort of defaults to hacker —> China? This should give us something of a clue about how Republicans process this stuff.

Second, this 22-year-old stoner hacked an AOL account. That’s not especially remarkable. Apparently McCaul also defaults to hacker —> supergenius. Quite a guy to have in charge of homeland security.

View original – 

Let’s Just Blame China for Everything and Call It a Day

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Let’s Just Blame China for Everything and Call It a Day