Tag Archives: united

More cheating automakers? Mitsubishi and Fiat are now in hot water too

More cheating automakers? Mitsubishi and Fiat are now in hot water too

By on Apr 27, 2016Share

Looks like VW isn’t the only carmaker with a truthiness problem.

Last week, Japanese manufacturer Mitsubishi admitted that the company has been overstating the fuel economy of some of its models for the past 25 years, as well as using testing standards that weren’t in compliance with Japanese law.

Ryugo Nakao, executive vice president of the company, told the Guardian that although Japanese emissions regulations changed 25 years ago to better reflect urban driving patterns and stop-and-go traffic, Mitsubishi failed to update its testing methods. “We should have switched, but it turns out we didn’t,” Nakao said.

The Japanese press is reporting that Mitsubishi’s top two executives will step down. The company may have to answer to U.S. regulators as well: The EPA, along with the California Air Resources Board, has ordered the carmaker to conduct additional emissions tests on vehicles sold in the U.S.

But Mitsubishi isn’t the only new resident of the doghouse. Fiat is also being accused of behaving badly — in its case, by cheating on emissions tests. Reuters reports that a probe into other car manufacturers after last year’s VW scandal revealed that some Fiat diesel engines also showed irregularities in emissions tests. In particular, investigators allege that the Fiat 500X uses software that turns off emission-control devices after the car has been running for 22 minutes.

As bad as these scandals are for manufacturers, they are worse for all of us who depend on breathable air and an inhabitable climate. Volkswagen’s emissions cheats alone are estimated to have caused as much air pollution annually as all of the United Kingdom’s power stations, vehicles, industry, and agriculture combined.

As for the environmental damage Mitsubishi and Fiat have caused, it’s too soon to speculate, but the companies themselves will certainly pay a price. Mitsubishi’s stock price fell by nearly 45 percent after its 25-year-long deception came to light. And just look at Volkswagen: Its emissions cheating scandal is projected to cost the company more than $35 billion.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

More:  

More cheating automakers? Mitsubishi and Fiat are now in hot water too

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, Naka, Nissan, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on More cheating automakers? Mitsubishi and Fiat are now in hot water too

Obamacare’s Competitive Markets Are Starting to Work Pretty Well

Mother Jones

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

The decision last week by United Healthcare to drop out of Obamacare got a lot of attention, but the truth is that UH was a pretty small player in the exchanges. What’s more important—but hasn’t gotten much attention—is the fact that more and more Obamacare insurers are getting close to profitability. Richard Mayhew comments:

2014 was a year where there were only guesses about both the Exchange population, the market structure, and federal policy structure (specifically the risk corridor revenue neutrality restrictions. 2015 had a bit more clarity on who was coming into the market, what was working and what was not working, and what federal policy on risk corridors would actually be. 2016 is the first year where the policies are priced on functionally decent real information and some of the amazingly dumb strategic decisions have been unwound through either course changes or through exiting the market.

As a simple reminder, competitive markets should see some companies make money and some companies that offer more expensive and less attractive products lose money. I would be extremely worried if everyone was making money after three years, just like I would be extremely worried that everyone was losing money after three years of increasingly better data.

Obamacare critics have spent a lot of energy trying to pretend that premiums on the exchanges have skyrocketed, but that’s never been true. What is true is that premiums started below projections and have since risen moderately as insurers get a better grasp on their customer base. This is how competitive markets work: players enter the market with prices designed to attract market share; customers pick winners and losers; prices adjust over time; and some companies are successful while others drop out. Eventually you reach a rough equilibrium, which we’re getting close to with Obamacare.

It’s ironic (or something) that the problems conservatives are making such a fuss about are the result of precisely what they say they want: competitive insurance markets. Apparently Obamacare has produced a little more competition than they’re comfortable with.

Read more: 

Obamacare’s Competitive Markets Are Starting to Work Pretty Well

Posted in ATTRA, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obamacare’s Competitive Markets Are Starting to Work Pretty Well

Will Citizens United Save Bob McDonnell From Prison?

Mother Jones

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

The Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United, which overturned restrictions on corporate and union campaign contributions, has been blamed for a lot of things: a flood of “ads that pull our politics into the gutter” (per President Barack Obama), the increased power of billionaires in politics, and even the rise of Donald Trump. This year, critics might be able to add another item to that list: keeping disgraced former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell out of prison.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the criminal case against the former rising star of the Republican Party. In January 2015, a federal judge sentenced McDonnell to two years in prison on corruption charges, stemming from his acceptance of loans and gifts from a political supporter. McDonnell is now fighting the sentence before the Supreme Court. The former governor argues that the charges against him should be thrown out, pointing to the court’s ruling in Citizens United where the court’s majority rejected the notion that political favors are always equivalent to criminal corruption. If the court agrees with McDonnell, prosecutors might have a more difficult time going after public corruption in the future.

Here are the facts of the case. When McDonnell took office in 2010, he and his wife were in deep financial trouble, in large part because of bad real estate investments. He owed credit card companies nearly $75,000 and was losing money on rental properties he owned with his sister in Virginia Beach that were mortgaged to the hilt. He’d borrowed $160,000 from friends and family to stay afloat.

Continue Reading »

See the article here – 

Will Citizens United Save Bob McDonnell From Prison?

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, Landmark, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Will Citizens United Save Bob McDonnell From Prison?

Hillary Clinton Really Loves Military Intervention

Mother Jones

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

Here’s what’s in the New York Times Magazine this week:

How Hillary Clinton Became a Hawk

But…no. This piece doesn’t really tell us how Hillary became a hawk—and that’s too bad. It would be genuinely interesting to get some insight into how (or if) her views have evolved over time and what motivates them. Still, even if he doesn’t really tell us why Hillary is so hawkish, Mark Landler makes it very, very clear that she is, indeed, a very sincere hawk:

Clinton’s foreign-policy instincts are bred in the bone — grounded in cold realism about human nature and what one aide calls “a textbook view of American exceptionalism.” It set her apart from her rival-turned-boss, Barack Obama, who avoided military entanglements and tried to reconcile Americans to a world in which the United States was no longer the undisputed hegemon. And it will likely set her apart from the Republican candidate she meets in the general election. For all their bluster about bombing the Islamic State into oblivion, neither Donald J. Trump nor Senator Ted Cruz of Texas have demonstrated anywhere near the appetite for military engagement abroad that Clinton has.

For all intents and purposes, Landler says that Hillary has been the most hawkish person in the room in almost literally every case where she was in the room in the first place. For example:

Adm. Robert Willard, then the Pacific commander, wanted to send the carrier on a more aggressive course, into the Yellow Sea….Clinton strongly seconded it. “We’ve got to run it up the gut!” she had said to her aides a few days earlier.

….After 9/11, Clinton saw Armed Services as better preparation for her future. For a politician looking to hone hard-power credentials — a woman who aspired to be commander in chief — it was the perfect training ground. She dug in like a grunt at boot camp.

….Jack Keane is one of the intellectual architects of the Iraq surge; he is also perhaps the greatest single influence on the way Hillary Clinton thinks about military issues….Keane is the resident hawk on Fox News, where he appears regularly to call for the United States to use greater military force in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan….The two would meet many times over the next decade, discussing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Iranian nu­clear threat and other flash points in the Middle East.

….Keane, like Clinton, favored more robust intervention in Syria than Obama did….He advocated imposing a no-fly zone over parts of Syria that would neutralize the air power of the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, with a goal of forcing him into a political settlement with opposition groups. Six months later, Clinton publicly adopted this position, further distancing herself from Obama.

….The Afghan troop debate….Her unstinting support of General McChrystal’s maximalist recommendation made it harder for Obama to choose a lesser option….“Hillary was adamant in her support for what Stan asked for,” Gates says….“She was, in a way, tougher on the numbers in the surge than I was.”

And Landler doesn’t even mention Libya, perhaps because the Times already investigated her role at length a couple of months ago. It’s hardly necessary, though. Taken as a whole, this is a portrait of a would-be president who (a) fundamentally believes in displays of force, (b) is eager to give the military everything they ask for, and (c) doesn’t believe that military intervention is a last resort, no matter what she might say in public.

If anything worries me about Hillary Clinton, this is it. It’s not so much that she’s more hawkish than me, it’s the fact that events of the past 15 years don’t seem to have affected her views at all. How is that possible? And yet, our failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria and elsewhere apparently haven’t given her the slightest pause about the effectiveness of military force in the Middle East. Quite the opposite: the sense I get from Landler’s piece is that she continues to think all of these engagements would have turned out better if only we’d used more military power. I find it hard to understand how an intelligent, well-briefed person could continue to believe this, and that in turn makes me wonder just exactly what motivates Hillary’s worldview.

View original post here: 

Hillary Clinton Really Loves Military Intervention

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Prepara, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Hillary Clinton Really Loves Military Intervention

Former Mexican President Slams Trump’s Plan to Pay for the Wall as "Absolutely Crazy"

Mother Jones

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

In an interview with Mother Jones on Tuesday, former Mexican president Vicente Fox intensified his war on Donald Trump and the GOP front-runner’s proposed wall between the United States and Mexico. In February, Fox declared, “I’m not going to pay for that fucking wall.” At that time, Trump had not detailed how he would make good on his plan to force Mexico to pay for the border wall. Since then, Trump has released a plan to compel Mexico to pick up the tab. He would demand from Mexico a one-time payment of $5 billion to $10 billion, and if Mexico failed to comply, he would freeze all wire transfers between undocumented workers and their home countries. He would also impose stiff trade tariffs on Mexican products and cancel visas for Mexicans traveling to the United States, and Mexican travelers would have to higher fees for visas and for border crossing cards.

Asked about Trump’s plan, Fox exclaimed it was “crazy” and demonstrated Trump’s “ignorance about the economy.” Fox added, “We cannot take him seriously.”

A wall along the southern border of the United States has become Trump’s most popular campaign promise. At his rallies, he routinely asks his throngs of supporters, “Who’s going to pay for the wall?” They scream in response, “Mexico!” In early April, when he released his plan for the wall, he estimated its construction would cost $8 billion he estimated. A more realistic estimate put the total closer to $25 billion, if he could even build it at all. His proposal asserted, “We have the moral high ground here, and all the leverage.”

Fox, the president of Mexico from 2000 to 2006, doesn’t think so. He told Mother Jones Tuesday that Trump’s plan makes no sense and would never happen. “It’s an absolutely crazy idea, it’s totally arbitrary, and it goes against established practices on transferences,” he said. “It’s impeding against the free transfer system that works throughout the world. He cannot do that. It’s impossible.”

Fox noted that Trump’s plan would backfire and harm the US economy, perhaps even Trump’s own businesses. Mexico and other countries, he said, would likely retaliate against the United States by imposing their own fees or restrictions on US money transfers, which would hurt American business. “It’s absolutely crazy,” Fox repeated. “It’s ignorant.” (Fox has trolled Trump on Twitter several times regarding the wall.)

Increasing tariffs on Mexican goods—and perhaps getting into a trade war with China, as Trump has suggested—would hurt US corporations doing business overseas, Fox insisted, and “kill the United States economy as we know it today.”

Trump campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks did not respond to a request for comment.

“Okay, what about the retaliation of Mexico, which will say I will not give visas to Americans to come to work in Mexico, or to come to Cancun?” Fox said. “It’s absolutely stupid. He’s going against all the operating procedures that we have developed worldwide through 200 years of history and open markets.”

Fox maintained that Trump shouldn’t be taken seriously, but he added, “The problem is that he’s causing severe damage to relationships that we hold in the world, diplomatic relationships, with all the free world. It’s just stupid.”

Trump has said that Mexico “has taken advantage” of the United States by allowing “gangs, drug traffickers, and cartels” to infiltrated the country and commit crimes here. Fox countered that the American drug market is the biggest in the world. “How can he have the moral ground if all of those drugs are consumed by his own citizens?” Fox remarked. “The huge drug consumption, the largest in the world, is right there in the United States.” Fox said the United States needed to do a better job of getting its own citizens to stop using drugs. He favors legalization as a means of reducing cartel violence. He also pointed out that most of the illegal drugs in the United States come from Central and South America (though the Mexican cartels do play a significant role).

Trump, Fox commented, is “showing his total ignorance about the way things work in this world.”

Continue reading – 

Former Mexican President Slams Trump’s Plan to Pay for the Wall as "Absolutely Crazy"

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Former Mexican President Slams Trump’s Plan to Pay for the Wall as "Absolutely Crazy"

The Supreme Court Justices Are in a Jam on Immigration

Mother Jones

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

When the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in a critical case, the justices often provide hints in their questions about how they might rule. But after Monday’s arguments in United States v. Texas, a challenge by 26 states to President Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration, the only thing that seemed clear was that the court was in a massive bind, having been asked to settle a contentious political question that it was not keen to address.

There were few, if any, hints—and this probably doesn’t bode well for the president’s attempt to bring 4 million immigrants out of the shadows and allow them a foothold into the legal employment market. The questions from the justices showed a marked lack of consensus on all the key issues at play. And if the court ends up deadlocked with a 4-4 vote, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling against the administration will stand, and Obama’s immigration action will be eviscerated.

The case stems from a lawsuit filed in December 2014, a month after the Obama administration ordered immigration officials to defer the deportation of millions of law-abiding immigrants who had come to the country illegally but had children who were US citizens or legal permanent residents. The action, which was blocked by the lower court before it could be implemented, wouldn’t grant any immigrants legal status, but it would permit many of them to apply for legal work authorizations and the ability to participate in the Social Security system.

Continue Reading »

Originally posted here: 

The Supreme Court Justices Are in a Jam on Immigration

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Justices Are in a Jam on Immigration

Meet the black activist who derailed a big polluting project before ​graduating college

Meet the black activist who derailed a big polluting project before ​graduating college

By on 18 Apr 2016commentsShare

Destiny Watford was a 17-year-old student at a south Baltimore high school when she asked a roomful of students if they suffered from asthma. To her dismay, every single hand went up.

That was three years ago, when Watford was in the middle of a fight to stop Energy Answers International from building a solid-waste incinerator in the Baltimore neighborhood of Curtis Bay. Her mother, along with many friends and family members, had asthma, and her neighbor died from lung cancer. The culprits seemed obvious to Watford: the medical-waste incinerator, coal pier, and slew of chemical plants surrounding Curtis Bay that foul the air. A proposed solid-waste incinerator, the biggest of its kind in the United States, was poised to move in a short walk from her high school.

Watford, along with other young people from Curtis Bay, decided to fight, largely by pressuring public officials. Last month, they scored a victory when state regulators pulled the incinerator project’s permit. For her efforts, the Goldman Environmental Foundation named the 20-year-old Watford one of six winners of this year’s Goldman Environmental Prize on Monday.

The award is fitting for Watford, who works with Free Your Voice, a human rights committee of United Workers. In 2015, the Goldman was presented to six people, including Berta Cáceres, an activist for indigenous rights who was killed in Honduras last month. It’s a prize for people who bring attention to the consequences that environmental inequities bear on their communities.

Watson, for instance, drew a connection between Baltimore’s environment and riots following the death of Freddie Gray, an unarmed, 25-year-old black man who died in police custody after getting arrested for no good reason. Residents rioted while officials fumbled to bring charges against the officers responsible for Gray’s death; Maryland’s governor declared a state of emergency, imposed a curfew and deployed the National Guard on Baltimore. Watford wondered why reporters weren’t asking what she called deeper questions about the environment in which the riots were taking place.

When I interviewed Watford, I asked her how she felt about winning. Her response was about winning the fight against the incinerator, not about winning the Goldman and its $175,000 award. A 20-year-old who’s more excited about stopping a waste incinerator than about winning a pile of money? Meet Destiny Watford, a young person who puts her community first. Here’s an edited portion of our recent conversation:

Q. Early on, you linked the death of Freddie Gray, the Baltimore riots, and the environment. Why?

A. Before we even learned about the incinerator, we were learning about our basic human rights. When we found out the incinerator was proposed to be built in our community, it violated every single value, belief, and basic human right that we had. When it come to the death of Freddie Gray, when it comes to incinerators, when it comes to the crisis in Flint, Michigan, those issues are different, but they’re not separate. They’re all issues of injustice — of systematic injustice, which we’ve been fighting against.

Q. What about environmental justice in particular? What do you think grassroots activists should understand about winning campaigns against big polluters?

A. When polluting developments are proposed, they’re usually in poor neighborhoods. They’re proposed in places where it’s perceived that our voices aren’t very strong, that there won’t be a public outcry, or that there isn’t a lot of power and so there won’t be a lot of pushback or resistance. And a lot of times, those are communities of color. It always comes down to who or what has power. When we’re resisting against an established system that creates developments like the incinerator, it’s really important to have power in communities if you are to win.

Q. You won a big victory against the proposed incinerator, but your community continues to be plagued by toxic pollution. What’s next for you?

A. As it stands now, all the air quality monitors have been removed from our community, so we don’t even know how much worse it’s gotten for us. As far as pollution goes, and how to even begin to figure out how to deal with it, I’m not completely sure, but there needs to be some sort of accountability. For instance, we’ve been working to bring in air quality monitoring to issue health impact assessments about the existing pollution in Curtis Bay. We need to measure and know what kind of specific pollution there is, how it’s affecting people, and how to deal with it.

Q. Yours is hard work. What gets you up in the morning to do it?

A. Just knowing an incinerator was going to be built in the community where I grew up, where my family grew up attracted me to working against it. Watching my nephews and other small family members grow up here, and watching neighbors and schoolmates — I mean, Curtis Bay is my home. I want to protect my home and the people that I care about. And the more I worked on the campaign, the more I came to realize that places like Curtis Bay have been taken advantage of and used for so long, and it’s really important to me that does not become our fate. That’s what gets me going.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

See original – 

Meet the black activist who derailed a big polluting project before ​graduating college

Posted in alo, Anchor, ATTRA, FF, G & F, GE, hydroponics, Keurig, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Meet the black activist who derailed a big polluting project before ​graduating college

Could a Typo Help Save the Planet?

Mother Jones

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

This story was originally published by the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

The United States and China are leading a push to bring the Paris climate accord into force much faster than even the most optimistic projections—aided by a typographical glitch in the text of the agreement.

More than 150 governments, including 40 heads of state, are expected at a symbolic signing ceremony for the agreement at the United Nations on April 22, which is Earth Day.

It’s the largest one-day signing of any international agreement, according to the UN.

But leaders will really be looking to see which countries go beyond mere ceremony and legally join the agreement, which would bind them to the promises made in Paris last December to keep warming below the agreed target of 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit).

So far, the US, China, Canada and a host of other countries have promised to join this year—boosting the hopes of bringing the Paris deal into force before the initial target date of 2020—possibly as early as 2016 or 2017, according to officials and analysts.

That is well before the timeline originally envisaged at Paris. Environment ministers attending the World Bank spring meetings this week said the faster pace indicated serious commitment to dealing with the global challenge.

The accelerated timeline would have one obvious advantage for Barack Obama. The standard withdrawal clause on any such agreement would force a future Republican president to wait four years before quitting Paris, according to legal experts.

An earlier start date could also turbo-charge the agreement, providing momentum for deeper emissions cuts.

It could also help efforts to attain the more ambitious goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees C (2 degrees F)—which would give a better chance of survival to small islands and other countries on the front lines of climate change.

Christiana Figueres, who heads the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, has said global emissions need to peak by 2020 to have any chance of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees C. There has already been about 1 degree C (1.8 degrees F) of warming above pre-industrial levels.

“Early entry into force—we are very committed to making that happen,” Catherine McKenna, Canada’s environment and climate change minister, told a panel at the World Bank last week. “We can’t just now rest on our laurels and have a nice signing on Earth Day, and then we all go home.”

She told the Guardian Canada was committed to signing the agreement this year.

The push to bring the climate agreement into force quickly is in sharp contrast to the earlier international efforts to fight climate change through the Kyoto Protocol, which did not take effect for four years.

Eliza Northrop, an analyst at the World Resources Institute, said there was growing momentum behind an early approval of the agreement.

“It’s likely it could come into effect in 2017. It could even happen this year,” she said.

Governments at the Paris climate meeting had initially set the start date of the agreement in 2020—with intense discussion over whether that start date should be at the start or end of the year, according to diplomats.

The 2020 date remained in the negotiating drafts almost until the very end, the diplomats said. But unaccountably the final draft prepared by France left out the entire clause. By that point, after a few late-night negotiating sessions, a number of countries did not notice the omission.

The agreement, the first time all countries agreed to emissions cuts and other actions to fight climate change, aims to limit warming to below 2 degrees C and move towards a zero-carbon economy by the end of the century.

But it’s a tall order. The agreement needs to be approved by 55 countries accounting for at least 55 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions to come into force.

The US and China committed to join the agreement this year—but that still leaves a gap of more than 15 percent of global emissions.

A number of countries, including India and Japan, require their parliaments to approve the Paris agreement—a process which could take time.

The European Union will need agreement from its 28 member states before it can join the agreement—which makes it highly unlikely to be in a position to join early on.

“The assumption is that you have to do this without the EU to get to that 55 percent hurdle, if you want to see that in the next year or so,” said Alden Meyer, strategy director for the Union of Concerned Scientists.

That will force governments to cobble together a coalition of smaller countries if they hope to reach the 55 percent emissions threshold.

Possible contenders include India, Mexico, the Philippines, and Australia.

So far, about 10 countries have said they would join the agreement this year.

On Wednesday, Román Macaya, Costa Rica’s ambassador to Washington, said his country would join the agreement in 2016. Palau, Switzerland, Fiji, and the Marshall Islands have also said they will approve the agreement this year.

Original link:

Could a Typo Help Save the Planet?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Paradise, Pines, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Could a Typo Help Save the Planet?

Daily Action to Celebate Earth Week: Restore Nature

The week leading up to Earth Day is a great time to focus attention on the individual steps we can each take to help protect the planet and ourselves. That’s why, throughout Earth Week (April 17 – April 23) we’ll be highlighting a daily action that can make a difference.

First up: Restore Nature

Nature depends on wilderness, wetlands, forests, prairies and even deserts to sustain the animals, plants and resources ecosystems need to thrive. But the natural world is quickly disappearing. Since the 1700s, the U.S. has lost over 50 percent of its wetlands.

Twenty-two states have lost at least 50 percent of their original wetlands, reports Environmental Concern, Inc., while in seven states over 80 percent of original wetlands have disappeared. The story is similarly grim when it comes to the loss of forests.

The United Nations Environment Programme reports that 13 million hectares of forests, an area equivalent to the size of Greece, are cut down around the world every year. And though over a quarter of the world was once covered by grasslands, much of that has now been turned into farms, energy development and even suburbs, says National Geographic.

Though you may not be able to plant a tract of prairie or singlehandedly restore a marsh, you can do the following to make a difference:

* Plant a tree in your own yard. Can this make a difference? I think of the neighborhood I grew up in as proof that it can. My neighborhood started off as a blank subdivision that had been clearcut so that every house could be easilybuilt on a small, treeless tract. One of the first things my parents and others did when they moved in was plant treesin their front yard as well as in the back. Today, that neighborhood is flush with mature trees that provide shade in the summer and wonderful habitat for all kinds of migrating birds.

* Fill your landscapewith native plants. Whether or not you plant a tree, you will probably have other flowers and bushes in your yard. As much as possible, skip the exotic species in favor of native plants that help restore nature’s balance to your community. Your local county extension agent will be able to tell you what’s native to your region, as well as what will thrive in your own yard given your access to sunlight and water.

* Get together with your neighbors to restore natural spaces. Convene a meeting with your city planning officials and other concerned citizens to identify parts of your neighborhood that you can replant. Connect with the Boy Scouts to stencil storm drains with messages that warn people that the drains connect to their watershed, so they shouldn’t dump oil, paint or other contaminants. Organize a stream clean-up.

* Stopinvasive species.Non-native plants and animals threaten native wildlife and ecosystems and wreak ecological havoc, says the National Wildlife Federation (NWF), which pushes many plants and animals to the brink of extinction. Next to habitat loss and degradation, invasive species are the biggest threat to biodiversity. They can also cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars because they can clog water pipes, decimate fisheries and propagate disease. NWF recommends setting up monitoring systems to detect infestations of these unwanted creatures, and, at home, eradicating invasives in favor of planting and maintaining a natural garden.

* Be water wise. Think about water in two ways: how you use it and how you keep it clean. We waste an enormous amount of water by letting faucets run; by watering grass; by ignoring leaks; and by running appliances like dishwashers and clothes washers when they’re somewhat empty. Save water in your yard by planting more drought-tolerant plants, tightening faucets, replacing toilets and shower heads with more water-wise models and running appliances when they’re full. Protect water quality by minimizing use of fertilizers, insecticides and other pollutants that can run off into streams, rivers and lakes. Buy organically grown food to help reduce agricultural water pollution. And stop using personal care products that contain plastic microbeads, tiny pieces of toxic plastic that wash down the drain and into our waterways.

What other ideas do you have for restoring Nature on Earth Day? We’d love to hear what you plan to do.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

View post:

Daily Action to Celebate Earth Week: Restore Nature

Posted in alo, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Daily Action to Celebate Earth Week: Restore Nature

Science Has Some Awesome News for Coffee Drinkers

Mother Jones

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

It’s a familiar feeling for any caffeine addict: a racing heart, fluttering away after one too many espresso shots. For years, that’s been enough to steer people with certain heart conditions away from coffee. But as it turns out, there’s little evidence that a caffeine habit could send us into cardiac arrest.

That’s according to Dr. Greg Marcus, a professor at the University of California-San Francisco and this week’s guest on the Inquiring Minds podcast. Marcus specializes in the treatment of arrhythmias, or irregular heartbeats—the fast, sluggish, or off-kilter rhythms that can trigger sudden cardiac arrest, an unexpected loss of heart function. The condition is different from a heart attack, which is caused by blockages to blood vessels leading to the heart, and it has seen comparatively little progress in treatment and prevention, Marcus says. In the United States, sudden cardiac arrest kills 325,000 adults each year.

`

Last year, Marcus’ research team looked into the relationship between caffeine and a type of arrhythmia called early beats, which can be a risk factor for developing heart failure. You can think of this condition as individual heart cells gone rogue. “If you take a heart cell out of the heart, put it in a petri dish, and keep it alive, it will beat on its own,” Marcus tells co-host Kishore Hari. Sometimes those cells will jump the gun, beating a little earlier than the rest of the heart.

“There’s this conventional wisdom that more caffeine leads to these early beats,” Marcus says. To find out if that’s really the case, his the team monitored heart rhythms along with consumption of common caffeine fixes such as tea, coffee, and chocolate. What they discovered might surprise you. “We could find no evidence of a relationship,” says Marcus. The results were published in the Journal of the American Heart Association.

Still, Marcus cautions that the heart risks of caffeine may depend on the individual and that more work needs to be done to unpack the role of a patient’s unique genetics and environmental exposures. This ties into a broader need for more precision medicine, he says—highly personalized treatments that take those specific factors into account. “The hope is that with modern techniques to sequence genes as well as to potentially monitor activity using technology, maybe we can really get down to that level,” he says.

Cue Health eHeart, a pioneering Big Data approach to develop strategies to prevent and treat all aspects of heart disease. The goal of the project is to use personal technology to free large-scale clinical research from its traditional home in brick-and-mortar hospitals, where researchers capture a controlled, artificial snapshot of participants’ health and behaviors. By gathering information from online surveys and personal gadgets (anything from smartphones to Bluetooth-enabled blood pressure cuffs), Marcus’ team at UCSF is able to study a continuous stream of health data as participants go about their daily activities. “That’s what I like to call real-time, real-life data,” he says.

Participants are given the option to get involved in a variety of studies depending on their backgrounds and the devices they use. Owners of a smart watch, for example, might be asked to opt into an ongoing study on atrial fibrillation—an irregular beat in the heart’s upper chambers that’s an important risk factor for stroke. The study attempts to develop a more nuanced understanding of what triggers the condition, making use of the watch’s heart rate monitor to interlace rhythmic data with other instantaneous measures of health and physical activity.

While the Health eHeart project aims to unpack the individualized factors that carry risk for heart disease, Marcus also hopes it will play a more foundational role for further research—”separating the wheat from the chaff,” as he puts it, by helping to figure out whether wearable devices are as beneficial to public health research as their makers chalk them up to be. Fitbit and the Apple Watch are examples, he says, of devices with savvy health and fitness marketing but still-untested claims: “Is it useful for health? We make that assumption, but how valid is it? And if it is valid, what is the best way to use it?”

UCSF hopes to enroll 1 million people in Health eHeart. If you want to take part in this ambitious study, you can sign up for the special Inquiring Minds Health eHeart group. Anyone over 18 years old is eligible, including those who are completely healthy, have heart disease, or are patients with cardiovascular conditions that we don’t yet know how to treat. Participation requires a few hours over the course of the year. (Note: Inquiring Minds co-host Kishore Hari is an academic staff member of UCSF, but he’s not affiliated in any way with the Health eHeart study.)

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.

See original:  

Science Has Some Awesome News for Coffee Drinkers

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Science Has Some Awesome News for Coffee Drinkers