Re: [Biofuel] A Greener Commute

[Keith Addison]

Hi Dawie

:-)

I fully agree, "Greener commute" is indeed an oxymoron. It's for 
"lite greens" who think changing their buying habits will solve the 
problem, although of course it's consumerism itself that's the 
problem.

Chris Hedges's "A Reality Check From the Brink of Extinction", which 
I posted the other day, ends with this:

>Alexander Herzen, speaking a century ago to a group of Russian
>anarchists working to topple the czar, reminded his followers that
>they were not there to rescue the system.
>
>"We think we are the doctors," Herzen said. "We are the disease."


Quite so.

Hedges just had a debate with Bill McKibben on "How Do We Solve the 
Environmental Crisis?" "Bill McKibben believes we must reduce our 
carbon emissions immediately, or else face disaster. Chris Hedges 
says that until we defeat corporate power, we can't address 
anything." See:


I think they're both right though. We also have to focus on what 
people will actually be prepared to do, as opposed to what they like 
to think they'd do if only... whatever. Many or even most people with 
greenish sympathies will have to be weaned off their massive carbon 
footprints. A greener commute would be one of many possible 
part-"solutions" that would at least in the meantime help to reduce 
the ovarall carbon footprint, as claimed. It's a start, it can help 
to encourage lite-greens to take the next step.

This is from a 2007 article, still pertinent. With average fuel 
economy in the US worse still than it was in 1987, and far worse than 
anywhere else, especially Europe and Japan, something like 85% of 
Americans had been polled as demanding tougher CAFE fuel economy 
standards. But:

>Consumers talk a good game about fuel economy before they arrive at 
>the showroom. But they get dazzled by glitzier features when they 
>walk into a dealership.
>
>"Customers will trade five miles per gallon to get fancy 
>cupholders," says Mike Jackson, head of AutoNation, the country's 
>largest auto retailer.
>
>Want proof? Back in 2000, when gasoline was the cheapest liquid 
>around, fuel economy ranked as the 29th most important attribute in 
>buying a car. Today, when gas costs as much as $3.25 a gallon, good 
>mileage still ranks only 22nd. Sound systems and convenience 
>features rank higher as purchase considerations.
>
>But rather than giving consumers an incentive to change their buying 
>habits, Bush wants to force automakers to build more fuel efficient 
>cars by raising the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards 
>for passenger cars and light trucks.
>
>By so doing, though, Bush is reviving an urban legend that the 
>technology is cheaply available if only the lazy old automakers 
>would bother to use it.
>
>We should be so lucky. Making people save gas by buying thriftier 
>cars, as General Motors executive Bob Lutz has said, is like telling 
>people to lose weight by wearing smaller clothes.

-- "Passing the buck on fuel economy - Instead of ensuring that we 
use less gas, politicians and consumers take the easy way out, says 
Fortune's Alex Taylor", April 9 2007


You can see both McKibben's view and Hedges's at work there. People 
want to do the right thing but they're drenched in all the 
consumerist spin. I can't blame them for that, I can only admire 
those that aren't.

However, Hedges is definitely right. To cross threads, Chris just 
wrote, on "American Public More Complacent About Climate Change", how 
generally cooler temperatures in the US this year had undermined the 
urgency, helped along by the MSM's usual lack of real coverage. While 
that's true, it not all that's true. I've been watching a couple of 
arguments about global warming on other lists, especialy on two lists 
composed largely of right-wing "Tea Party" types. What Chris sees is 
right there, but it comes with all the familiar orchestrated "Tea 
Party"-type tropes - the facts of the cooler weather are reinforced 
by all the same old thoroughly debunked denialist crap, the 
discussions quickly become irrational, and global warming gets buried 
yet again, despite the brave efforts of the few who try to include 
the real facts that are being blind-eyed, such as vanishing glaciers 
and so on. It doesn't work, rational arguments just bounce off.

And they'll continue to bounce off just as long as corporatism gets 
to call the tune as it does now.

So, IMHO, the increasing numbers of consumers trying to take their 
first faltering steps towards sane behaviour really need 
encouragement, not just dismissal.

All best

Keith


>"Greener commute" is an oxymoron.
>
>In fact "greener" is an oxymoron, like "deader".
>
>"Green commute" might be perfectly sensible if it refers to a 

Re: [Biofuel] China's next great leap forward - the electric car

[Keith Addison]

Hi Bob, thanks for this.

>China's latest electric car, the E6, can travel 250 miles on a single
>charge, recharge in seven hours at home or get a half charge in ten minutes
>from a service station.
>
>Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8315947.stm (via
>shareaholic)

But, the usual question, where does the charge power come from?

That's one reason I posted this piece, though I didn't get a chance 
to follow it up at the time:

[Biofuel] 'Cove' debut draws mixed reactions
Sun, 27 Sep 2009

>"The Cove," a film about dolphin slaughters in Taiji, Wakayama 
>Prefecture, drew a mixed response from an audience of 150 that 
>included foreign journalists in Tokyo on Friday evening, the first 
>time the award-winning movie has been screened in Japan.

What do slaughtered dolphins have to do with a Chinese electric car? Read on.

I first got involved in attempts to try to stop the annual Taiji 
dolphin kill-fest in 1983. It really is about time it ended. But 
there's a whole new element since 1983.

>"It's about contaminating people with mercury, not about animal 
>rights," O'Barry, a former dolphin trainer for the 1960s TV show 
>"Flipper," said in a news conference after the film. "Most Japanese 
>people don't know what's going on in Taiji. They need to know."
>
>However, some in the audience thought the film makes an emotive 
>appeal against the slaughters based on their brutality, rather than 
>the danger of consuming methyl mercury.

Tests of people in Taiji found extremely high levels of mercury, way 
higher than any safe limit, and not just in Taiji. The Taiji 
fishermen kill about 2,000 dolphins and pilot whales every year, but 
they're not the only ones - Japanese fishing communities kill a total 
of 20,000 dolphins a year. And the Japanese eat them - not just the 
local fishing communities, the dolphin meat has now become part of a 
school lunch programme.

There was a major cover-up here about the mercury hazard, now 
uncovered thanks to "The Cove" and, very much, thanks to a couple of 
brave local whistle-blowers.

Anyway, I do try, but I must admit that I find it a little difficult 
to muster that much sympathy for mercury-laden Japanese, you'd think 
they'd know better, considering the Minamata scandal. 
 
 
They forgot? It's hard not to have more sympathy for the murdered 
dolphins. (Yes, I know "murdered" is an emotive word.) And I don't 
think it's any more fun for dolphins to carry such a burden of 
mercury toxicity than it was for the Minamata victims. Neither is it 
very amusing that our much-beleaguered oceans now have this extra 
burden to bear.

Where does all this mercury in the Pacific come from, all of a sudden?

Here's the point: it comes from China, which is commissioning one 
coal-fired power plant PER DAY to fuel its economic expansion. One a 
day.

And that's where the power to charge the E6 electric car almost 
certainly comes from.

Hey ho.

:-(

Best

Keith



___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Re: [Biofuel] A Greener Commute

[Chris Burck]

you're right, keith.  thanks for taking the time to point that out.
it's a sort of double-think process.  there's no doubt in my mind that
many of those who have dialed down their sense of urgency vis a vis
global warming still believe it's a serious problem, but the mild
temps means part of their mind starts to listen to the denial
arguments, if only to allow themselves to postpone the inevitable
adjustments.  the whole consumerist paradigm is indeed fundamental.  i
wanted to tie that in but was a bit pressed for time so tried to hint
at it while making my main point.  re, the hertzen quote, it
definitely has a grim appeal.  those russian arnachists were some bad
actors, weren't they?

___
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/