Category Archives: Environment

Ignorance is Best Way to Make Decisions According to Bush

Who needs facts? Not George Bush when it comes to global warming. His actions speak louder than words he mouths to lull us into inaction.

In a confidential report to the White House, obtained by the Associated Press and as reported today in the Seattle Times , NOAA and NASA scientists have told President Bush that:

US scientists will soon lose much of their ability to monitor warming from space …the Defense Department has decided to downsize and launch four satellites … instead of six… will now focus on weather forecasting … Most of the climate instruments needed to collect more precise data for long periods are being eliminated.” …

“Unfortunately, the recent loss of climate sensors … places the overall climate program in serious jeopardy,” NOAA and NASA scientists told the White House in the report.

They said they will face major gaps in data that can be collected only from satellites: about ice caps and sheets, surface levels of seas and lakes, sizes of glaciers, surface radiation, water vapor, snow cover and atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Rick Piltz, director of Climate Science Watch, a watchdog program of the Washington-based Government Accountability Project, called the situation a crisis.

“We’re going to start being blinded in our ability to observe the planet,” said Piltz, whose group provided the AP with the previously undisclosed report. “It’s criminal negligence.”

In an ABC news report on May 29, 2007, entitled “10 Years to Climate Tipping Point” new research emphasized the urgency of having detailed accurate information such as the satellite program would provide:

Even “moderate additional” greenhouse emissions are likely to push Earth past “critical tipping points” with “dangerous consequences for the planet,” according to research conducted by NASA and the Columbia University Earth Institute.

With just 10 more years of “business as usual” emissions from the burning of coal, oil and gas, says the NASA/Columbia paper, “it becomes impractical” to avoid “disastrous effects.”

The study appears in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. Its lead author is James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

The forecast effects include “increasingly rapid sea-level rise, increased frequency of droughts and floods, and increased stress on wildlife and plants due to rapidly shifting climate zones,” according to the NASA announcement .

You can read more on the NASA-NOAA report by going to the Climate Science Watch website .

Briefing Notes on NASA-NOAA Joint Document gives a summary of report.

Impacts of NPOESS NunnMcCurdy Certification on Joint NASA_NOAA Climate Goals is a copy of the full report dated Dec 11, 2006.

Note the date of this report – 6 months ago. There is no response yet from the White House on the Associated Press report but it is obvious that Bush has taken no action to alter the situation. If he had you can be sure the White House would have instantly responded that they had decided to fully fund the existing program to continue our long term gathering and monitoring of the global climate situation.

Bush and Cheney and their oil friendly cabal running things have no intention of seriously addressing global warming and are doing everything they can to sabotage the efforts of scientists to get accurate data and take immediate action. Bush’s program is to stall as much as he can for the next year and a half any efforts to take decisive action.

Warning – look at what Bush does, not what he says he’s “doing”. Only then will we not be blindsided by wimpy press coverage that uncritically reports Bush’s smoke and mirrors plan for global warming which does not seriously address doing much of anything. Right now it’s comparable to his administration’s plan to help Hurricane Katrina’s victims.

His global warming study plan is on track. Don’t be surprised if you see pictures of President Bush looking out the window of Air Force One once or twice to check out the global warming situation over the Atlantic Ocean as he flies to Europe for the G-8 Conference June 6-8, 2007. Do you really expect more? I don’t.

The Great Bush Gasoline Reduction Deception.

Two weeks ago President Bush strolled into the White House Rose Garden and announced that he was taking action to reduce gasoline use by 20% over 10 years. Sounds great right.

Only thing is, it’s a lot of smoke and mirrors. First off, when you examine the actual words of what he said it’s really ambiguous as to what he has committed to do regarding reducing gasoline use. He’s really made no commitment to do anything more than study the issue further and what he has proposed is patently deceptive in that overall fuel use by cars and trucks will continue to go up.

One huge problem is that while reducing something 20% sounds great it is misleading and meant to deceive the public. It is a cover for doing very little in 10 years The goal he’s talking about is not a 20% reduction in fuel use, it’s specifically a 20% reduction in “gasoline use”. And three quarters of the 20% “reducing vehicle gasoline use” is actually a fuel shift to alternative fuels like ethanol and other biofuels.

The truth is Bush is only proposing a 5% reduction in gasoline use over 10 years and a 15% shift in use of gasoline to alternative fuels over this 10 year period. While this will have some impact in reducing dependence on foreign oil, the overall impact on reducing global warming is unclear. While shifting to some alternative fuels will reduce global warming gases, a shift to others would actually increase overall global warming gases produced.

The problem remains that all of this is hypothetical – Bush is asking for more study to produce recommendations before he leaves office next year. His answer to global warming is just like his answer to the Iraq War – leave it to the next President.

California has asked for a waiver to increase fuel efficiency standards. Bush’s study proposal is in fact a way for Bush to avoid acting on this waiver before he leaves office. It’s obvious he has no intent to seriously address global warming issues or make any serious attempt to actually significantly reduce our consumption of fuel and oil. The truth is he has the power to act now to increase fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks. But he’s not going to. He’s not going to do antything to hurt his business friends in the oil industry from continuing to make record profits.

Its really up to Congress to act because Bush has not committed himself to do much of anything. Bush is just playing word games trying to pull another fast one on the public.

After Earth Day 2007

April 22 has passed but We and the Earth are still here. Did you make any resolutions or promises to yourself and our fellow earth travelers to do something to help the planet or even to just not make things any worse? Here are a few thoughts on some small and large actions that you can do. Feel free to add your own at the end.

1. buy food grown locally to reduce transportation costs
2. buy organic foods to reduce pollution by chemicals
3. buy fluorescent lights to save energy
4. recycle to conserve resources and reduce energy costs
5. buy reusable canvas bags instead of using paper or plastic
6. when you don’t need a bag say so
7. give reusable items to thrift stores, saving resources and creating jobs
8. walk to local destinations rather than drive
9. urge public officials to build more sidewalks
10. support local transit – ride the bus one day a week or month
11. don’t buy unnecessary gifts of little or no use
12. support those working to protect the environment – join an environmental group
13. vote for candidates with strong environmental records or positions
14. write letters, e-mail or call legislators to support strong environmental laws
15. support negotiation and diplomacy, instead of war, to resolve conflicts
16. support environmental education programs at schools and colleges
17. ask to be removed from junk mail lists
18. have your pet spayed or neutered
19. support programs for birth control education around the world
20. put outside lights on motion sensitive detectors
21. tell Congress to pass stringent fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks
22. tell Congress to require pre-testing before new chemicals are sold
23. tell Congress to pass new legislation to make polluters pay for cleanup
24. car pool when you can to work and meetings
25. plants some trees
26. take your children to the beach or a park or for a hike in the mountains
27. ask hotels and motels and restaurants where to recycle your recyclables
28. make sure your local schools recycle
29. don’t use toxic chemicals on your lawn
30. don’t dump toxic chemicals or medicine down your drain
31. support local and state land use planning
32. support renewable energy programs
33. turn down your thermostat as well as buy a programmable one
34. if uncertain, give cash rather than gifts so people can buy something they really want
35. think of others ways you can reduce your impact on the earth

Reflections on Earth Day 2007

Every day is Earth Day when you think about it. What we do every day determines the future of the earth as we know it. The reality we face is that there is less and less margin of error to allow us to correct for mistakes.

We are still at a very primitive stage of understanding the delicate balance of the earth’s multiple environmental systems that keep it all together and working. We do global computer modeling based on things we think we understand and come up with projections of what might happen. The earth has feedback loops to adjust for changes like global warming but these loops have limits. Exceed the limits and the whole thing falls apart. Ask yourself how many people have had their home aquarium system die off.

The question for the future of earth is whether mankind comes to accept those limits or realizes too late that some things are not controllable by man at this time, if ever. Will we make changes in time to prevent a breakdown to our current operating systems for planet earth? Are we willing to come together to find a commonly shared solution or is it every nation and every corporation and every individual for themselves?

The prudent course of action when the engine light comes on in a car is to stop what you’re doing and check out why it came on. Warning lights are going on now on the earth – the most obvious being global warming and climate change. But also the disappearance of established ecosystems with associated habitats and species is also occurring like coral reef destruction and loss of major fisheries. We are literally spraying the earth with a host of chemicals whose long term effects we know little about let alone short term effects. Nature has a potential to recover if we don’t exceed global limits.

Our chemical impact is coming about for a variety of reasons. These include the introduction of new chemicals by the free enterprise market system which does not include an upfront analysis of impacts before chemicals are sold and released into the environment. Mining operations, smelters and chemical processing plants, coal plants, pharmaceutical and drug companies, military weapons, recycling operation, toxic waste dumping, disposal operations, you name it, there are thousands and thousands of ways we are producing, mixing, distributing and changing the chemical composition of our living environment that is cumulatively building up negative impacts.

Science usually operates by doing controlled experiments where you change one factor while holding the others constant. The earth is now like one huge laboratory where thousands of changes and chemical experiments and biological experiments are occurring simultaneously and very few are being tracked or understood.

The stakes are huge. Where once you would see something go awry locally, now many changes are occurring on a vastly larger scale because we are experimenting with changing things on a global level. Chernobyl was an example of a local incident that spread regionally. I remember going through a former mining area in the West some 30 years or so ago. The closer you got to where the smelter had been the more stunted the vegetation got.

Today with coal plants the same thing happens. Burning high sulfur coal produces sulfur dioxide which can be converted to sulfuric acid – that’s what acid rain is. The visible effects are regional not local and are becoming global as more chemicals get introduced into the atmosphere, our land and the oceans. A recent report cited air pollution from China showing up in the western United States. Carbon dioxide buildup occurs in the atmosphere as more plants are built. China in its attempt to catch up with the US prosperity model is planning on building one new coal plant a week.

While there is one earth, there is not one world. We are still a mish mash of warring ideologies and factious peoples. Capitalism creates an economic battle for competing markets and resources in which cooperation and restraint seem a lower priority than winning market share. Religious ideologies and war also are fracturing world unity.

While capitalism has increased material goods and comfort and produced many advances in science and medicine and other areas it also has placed a higher value on individual rewards and ownership rather than addressing community needs and shared prosperity worldwide. The AIDS crisis in Africa and people still suffering starvation and malnutrition around the world are just two examples of problems the world community is not addressing together with compassion.

That is not to say we can not change but to do so means more emphasis on shared values of one world and one people all sharing one earth. Instead the world remains divided by political, economic, and religious boundaries. We still build fences to keep us separate.

For religion to change, it means accepting that we are all children of a God who exhibits himself or herself in numerous manifestations. We are all God’s chosen people. There is not one chosen people or religion.

For economic systems it means accepting each other as partners and workers in one company with shared rewards. We are not competing against each other but we are working to provide basic human needs for all and sharing fairly in the rewards of hard work. We can not view others as nations or people to exploit or dominate or take advantage of.

For political systems it means governments will have to work to provide services fairly to all people, not give special tax breaks to the wealthy or tax exemptions to favored corporations.

For political systems and religions, nations need to separate religious belief systems that divide and limit people from political systems and governments that provide basic health care, nutrition, housing, food and education. Religions that limit freedom by domination and exploitation and edicts destroy human dignity and well being.

The future of the earth depends on mankind evolving into one co-operative worldwide caring community. We need to implement policies world wide that support individual life and human dignity without giving up basic freedoms. We need to develop a non-exploitative sustainable economic policy toward each other and the earth which currently sustains all of us. We need an economy that is not dependent on continual growth but that is sustainable in terms of the limits that exist for maintaining life on planet earth.

And we need to implement political policies that are fair to all by guaranteeing basic rights for all. These include access to adequate and safe food, clean water, clean air, housing, basic education and basic human rights. Religious policies need to accept the worth of every individual and practice tolerance for differences.

The future of the earth for humans depends on facing the reality that things need to change. Together we can envision and work for a future that allows us to live peacefully together, working for our common good. History is replete with wars and conquests. One side loses and the other wins. The reality of the earth today is that in a battle with the earth we all lose if we don’t accept the reality of the fact that no one wins if we perish as a species because we didn’t pay attention to the warning lights. The warning lights are blinking.

EarthCorps and Earth Day 2007

EarthCorps is a Seattle based nonprofit that is “dedicated to building global community through local environmental restoration service.” Appropriately yesterday they were out in force holding an Earth Day work session in conjunction with Duwamish Alive!

My son was volunteering with the UW/Seattle University team and met at 9:30 A.M. at South Seattle Community College. He worked with others until 3:00 P.M. pulling out invasive blackberry bushes from the W. Duwamish greenbelt area. Others helped pull ivy and mulch with wood chips. This fall native plants will be planted in cleared areas. Last weekend my son was at Golden Gardens pulling out ivy.

EarthCorps is an affiliate of AmeriCorps. Young people aged 18 -25 participate in a year long program learning about conservation, habitat restoration and developing skills in working with and coordinating volunteers from 8 years to 80 years old.

The event yesterday drew several hundred volunteers both as individuals and supporting groups. The largest group contingent was volunteers from Boeing. Other groups turning out volunteers included Seattle Works, alumni from Boston College and Emory University and Safeco as well as University of Washington and Seattle University students.

Local financial support for EarthCorps comes from groups like REI, essurance, Washington Women’s Foundation, the City of Seattle, King County and the City of Mercer Island.

I had a chance to talk with Chris LaPointe who is the Volunteer Program Manager for EarthCorps. He emphasized that one of the goals of EarthCorps is to get local people involved in their community. Doing restoration work that involves local people helps to foster long term stewardship. Emphasis is placed on working with local schools and colleges to foster support for local greenbelts and parks over the long term.

You too can get involved. Chris handed me a flyer that said that May 5, 2007 has been designated No Ivy Day! Two locations are being worked on. One is Lincoln Park in West Seattle. The other is Island Crest Park on Mercer Island. For more information visit www.earthcorps.org or call Chris LaPointe at 206-322-9296 x217.

Bush Going Backward on Environment says John Kerry

John Kerry and Teresa Heinz Kerry spoke passionately last night at Seattle’s Town Hall regarding “this moment in time”. Using their recently written book entitled “This Moment in Time” as a stepping off point, John Kerry and his wife spoke about their ongoing concerns regarding real threats to the future of “Mother Earth.”

John Kerry derided the Bush Administration for going backwards on dealing with environmental threats to our future and said that it was “intolerable.” Citing environmental concerns today as broader than global climate change with its impending threats, he said we are “facing tipping points on a series of issues” dealing with the environment.

Citing Bush’s “shameless attack” on the environment, he gave a series of examples. In 19 states you can’t take your kids fishing. Some 44 states have advisories against eating fish and in some 44 rivers and harbors you can’t fish or swim. Bush’s “Clean Skies” legislation actually allowed 5x as much pollution than if the law had been left intact. Our major fisheries are all over fished. The “polluter pays” cleanup legislation was abandoned by Bush. Roadless areas were opened to new roads and cutting. The list is numerous.

The incentive for the Kerry’s to write their book was to give people hope and to write about what individuals across the country have been doing despite the wanton assault by Bush. The book details stories of people fighting to protect our future. The book ends with a series of things individuals can do to help, noting it is important to act because the US contributes 25% of the global pollution contributing to Global Warming. And if we hope to get action on reducing China’s threat to build a new coal plant every week, we must be sincere in reducing our contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.

Citing that 928 peer reviewed scientific studies point to man’s impact on global warming and not one peer reviewed study speaks to the contrary, Kerry says the prudent thing to do is to apply the “Precautionary Principle.” If all these studies are wrong and we still acted on them, at the worst, we would have a cleaner world and be energy independent . But if we don’t act on them and they are right we will have “a catastrophe.”

Teresa Heinz Kerry described her work on what I consider one of the unacknowledged sleeper threats facing us. That is the cumulative impact of all the different chemicals that we have released into the living environment that have unforeseen impacts and consequences. Of some 80,000 different chemicals produced for the market, only 10,000 have been vetted by the FDA as to safety. And this speaks nothing to synergistic effects or impacts of random combinations of chemicals.

Sewage treatment does not remove minute quantities of most chemicals. For example, medicines people take eventually wind up in the water supply, in either the original form or altered form. Heinz Kerry noted for example the reported presence of chemotherapy waste in one study and the presence of Prozac in London in another, appearing in water. Birth control chemicals and other chemicals that affect reproductive behavior in humans also impact other living species. Yet there is little attention being paid to these chemicals accumulating in the environment and their long term impacts.

Heinz Kerry said that one of her life lessons is that if you don’t do certain things to protect yourself when you know there are potential consequences you will pay the price. From her childhood in Africa she learned it’s common sense not to go into the stream with piranhas when its feeding time. She said it is frequently blind arrogance and greed that contribute to needless suffering. Using the Precautionary Principle she said means we look at the facts and work to prevent or mitigate potential harm and disaster.

John Kerry and Teresa Heinz Kerry may not be in the White House but they are living their principles and passions by acting on them. We are all fortunate to have such caring individuals continuing to do public service for the world by speaking out and writing books like “This Moment in Time: the New Pioneers on the Environmental Frontier.”

Teressa Heinz Kerry and Senator John Kerry – Tonight at Town Hall

The Kerry’s will be at Town Hall tonight in Seattle to discuss their new book,
This Moment on Earth: the New Pioneers on the Environmental Frontier”
The talk will start at 7:30 P.M., on Tuesday April 3, 2007,
at Seattle’s Town Hall
8th and Seneca
Tickets $5 at door
The Kerry’s were on KUOW this morning from 9 A.M. to 10 A.M.
Click on the Weekday program audio link to hear the program.

Seattle PI Comics Undercuts Editorial Board

The Seattle PI on Sunday editorialized on the plight of African elephants again being slaughtered in large numbers for ivory. Research done right here in Washington State by the University of Washington’s Center for Conservation Biologyshows elephants are again being slaughtered for their ivory tusks.”

Meanwhile on the “Kids’ Page” of the Seattle PI Comics, the Mark Trail hunter friendly comic strip emphatically states that “The very animal (elephant)that is considered one of Africa’s most valuable assets has become one of it’s biggest problems.”
Let’s look a little closer at the truth of what “Mark Trail” says. “The two main killers in East Africa are HIV/AIDS and wild animals, particularly elephants. Because of their large appetites and migration habits, elephants are destroying crops , killing farmers and terrorizing neighbors.” Right below this sentence we see what looks like a white skinned man being tossed in the air over the elephant’s head.

God, this sounds pretty horrible – AIDS/HIV and elephants!! Only problem is it’s not true that elephants are the number two killer.

The World Bank in a 2006 414 page report entitled “Disease and Mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa” reports that out of some 10,788,044 deaths in 2000 the following breakdown occurred.

1 HIV/AIDS………………………………….20.4% = 2,200,761
2 Malaria………………………………………10.1% = 1,161,662
3 Lower respiratory infections………..9.8% = 700,573
4 Diarrheal diseases……………………….6.5% = 550,190
5 Perinatal conditions…………………….5.1% = 442,310
6 Measles……………………………………..4.1% = 442,310
7 Cerebrovascular disease………………3.3% = 336,005
8 Ischemic heart disease…………………3.1% = 334,429
9 Tuberculosis……………………………….2.8% = 301,785
10 Road traffic accidents ………………..1.8% = 194,184
11 Pertussis…………………………………..1.6% = 172,609
12 Violence …………………………………..1.2% = 129,337
13 COPD………………………………………..1.1% = 118,668
14 Tetanus…………………………………….1.0% = 107,780
15 Nephritis and nephrosis………………0.9% = 97,092
16 Malnutrition ……………………………. 0.9% = 97,092
17 War …………………………………………0.8% = 86,304
18 Syphilis ………………………………….. 0.8% = 86,304
19 Diabetes mellitus……………………… 0.7% = 75,516
20 Drownings ……………………………… 0.6% = 64,728
21 All other specific causes…………..23.2%= 2,502,826
* numbers are calculated from %’s taken from table on page 77 in report cited above.

So where are the figures for deaths caused by wild animals particularly elephants in this breakdown. National Geographic in a documentary entitled “Elephant Rage” stated that about 500 people worldwide each year are killed by elephants. Even falsely claiming these deaths would all be in Africa, they would comprise only .000046% of the year 2000 deaths.

So where does macho hunter “Mark Trail” get off on claiming elephants as one of the two main killers in East Africa. Car accidents in the above table alone killed some 194,000 people. Measles some 442,000. After AIDS/HIV, the number two killer was a mosquito, killing some 1.16 million people.. But I guess mosquitoes are hard to shoot with guns, so they don’t qualify as killers.

The next drawing in the ‘Mark Trail” cartoon depiction shows 3 large elephants charging what again looks like a white skinned person who has his hands up in the air, like he’s trying to surrender. The commentary is “Their increase in population is a problem in many parts of Africa as they are turning farm ecosystems into desert areas. The elephant’s fondness for sweet potatoes and other cultures crops has made them a nuisance to some farmers.”
It’s a curious turn of phrase to call what was once a wild natural ecosystem that was populated by elephants as now a farm ecosystem and blame the elephants for turning it into desert areas. The website Bagheera: In the Wild notes that:

The African elephant once roamed the entire continent of Africa, and the Asian elephant ranged from Syria to northern China and the islands of Indonesia. These abundant populations have been reduced to groups in scattered areas south of the Sahara and in isolated patches in India, Sri Lanka, and Southeast Asia.

Demand for ivory, combined with habitat loss from human settlement, has led to a dramatic decline in elephant populations in the last few decades. In 1930, there were between 5 and 10 million African elephants. By 1979, there were 1.3 million. In 1989, when they were added to the international list of the most endangered species, there were about 600,000 remaining, less than one percent of their original number.”

The World Wildlife Fund notes that

In both Africa and Asia , elephant habitat is being replaced by agriculture – both by small-scale farmers and international agribusiness such as palm oil. Not only are the animals being squeezed into smaller and smaller areas, but farmers plant crops that elephants like to eat. As a result, elephants frequently raid and destroy crops. And after being persecuted for decades and hunted almost to extinction, a wild elephant’s reaction to a human can be similar to our reaction to a mosquito – swat it. So while many people in the West regard elephants with affection and admiration, the animals often inspire fear and anger in those who share their land.”

In a New York Times article last year where they discuss ‘‘Elephant Breakdown,’’ a 2005 essay in the journal Nature, Bradshaw and several colleagues argued that

“today’s elephant populations are suffering from a form of chronic stress, a kind of species-wide trauma. Decades of poaching and culling and habitat loss, they claim, have so disrupted the intricate web of familial and societal relations by which young elephants have traditionally been raised in the wild, and by which established elephant herds are governed, that what we are now witnessing is nothing less than a precipitous collapse of elephant culture .

It has long been apparent that every large, land-based animal on this planet is ultimately fighting a losing battle with humankind. And yet entirely befitting of an animal with such a highly developed sensibility, a deep-rooted sense of family and, yes, such a good long-term memory, the elephant is not going out quietly. It is not leaving without making some kind of statement, one to which scientists from a variety of disciplines, including human psychology, are now beginning to pay close attention. “

Unfortunately spreading falsehoods and depicting the threatened elephant as a killer because that is how hunters like to view their sport of killing wild animals only helps to further erode efforts to not have the wild elephant’s only future be a trophy head on someones wall like of old or ivory trinkets in someone’s jewelry box. It’s time for Mark Trail to go the way of the elephant hunter of the past. The Seattle PI should cancel the strip.

China and India’s Soot, Smog and Wood Smoke Comes to the Northwest

Asia’s growing air pollution – billowing million ton plumes of soot, smog and wood smoke – is making the Pacific region cloudier and stormier, disrupting winter weather patterns along the West Coast and into the Arctic” reads the first sentence of a headline story in today’s Seattle Times. Just one more example of the interconnectedness of our climate worldwide and mankind’s impact on changing it.

The story was written by Robert Lee Holtz of the Los Angeles Times. While the Seattle Times reprint of the story includes most of the LA Times article (I’ve printed what was deleted below), it changed the headline to a question. Reading the original story, I wonder why?

The LA Times headline said “Asian air pollution affecting weather. The Pacific region has become stormier, scientists say.”
The Seattle Times headline puts it as a question – “Is Asia’s bad air stirring storms in West? New Research Study. Pollution may be seeding storm clouds on West Coast”

Read the first sentence again and read the article. Read the sentences the Seattle Times omitted from the original story. Why has the Seattle Times slanted the original story with it’s headline asked as a question? The result is that the research is downplayed. What seemed like strong statements supporting the conclusions of the study as reported by the LA Times are instead called into question.

The Seattle Times headline question makes it appear as if the research raised questions that hadn’t been answered. Where did the doubting headline come from? Isn’t this type of editorial doubting just one more example of why it’s taken so long to get movement on addressing pollution issues like global warming ?

In its discussion The LA Times cited a new study released yesterday. “Carried on prevailing winds, the industrial outpouring of dust, sulfur, carbon grit, and trace metals from booming Asian economies is having an intercontinental cloud seeding effect” writes the LA Times regarding a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. The PNAS is one of the world’s leading scientific journals respected for its research studies that are peer reviewed before they are published.

The lead researcher in the study, Renyi Zhang of Texas A&M University states that, “The pollution transported from Asia makes storms stronger and deeper and more energetic. It is a direct link from large-scale storm systems to [human produced] pollution.”

So now you know why we had that record rainfall just a short while ago. All those “Made in China” and Made in Korea” or “Made in India” things we bought so cheap are really coming with an additional cost. Maybe they’re not as big of a bargain after all.

What the Seattle Times left out of the LA Times article:

In fact, on any spring or summer day, almost a third of the air high over Los Angeles, San Francisco and other California cities can be traced directly to Asia, researchers said. …

Usually, dust and industrial pollutants take from five days to two weeks to cross the Pacific to California. …

At monitoring sites along the U.S. West Coast, scientists have been detecting pollutants that originated from smokestacks and tailpipes thousands of miles to the west.

Recently, researchers at the University of Washington have captured traces of ozone, carbon monoxide, mercury and particulate matter from Asia at monitoring sites on Mt. Bachelor in Oregon and Cheeka Peak in Washington state.

Cliff and his colleagues have been picking up the telltale chemical signatures of Asian particulates and other pollutants at several monitoring sites north of San Francisco and, during the last year, around Southern California….
“The air above Los Angeles is primarily from Asia,” Cliff
said. “Presumably that air has Asian pollution incorporated into
it.”

Headline comparisons:
A separate story in the Oregonian has this headline: “China’s dirty air threatens darker days for Northwest.” A statement, not a question.

Likewise The San Francisco Chronicle – “Pollution Tied to Rainstorms” puts the headline as a statement.

While the Tacoma News Tribune said “Pollution Tied to Rainstorms“, at least the Seattle Times reprinted most of the article in the LA Times. The TNT gave it a scant 4 short paragraphs.

The Olympian ran an AP story entitled – ‘Study finds Asia’s pollution brews storms over Pacific”

And while the Seattle PI has a story posted on its website with a statement headline (AP story – “Asian Pollution affects Pacific Storms” and 2 updates, I should note that today’s print edition had no story. Hopefully there will be a story in tomorrow’s print edition.

And I can not say for sure which of the other stories besides the Seattle Times story was also carried in their print editions.

Proposed Viaduct in Seattle is a Mega-Luxury Project we Don’t Need

When you think about it, the proposed Seattle Viaduct Governor Gregoire wants is a Mega-Luxury Project using 1950’s traffic solutions for the 21st century. The Viaduct is gross misrepresentation of the actual needs for that transportation corridor and shows no innovation in dealing with reducing traffic flows and reducing fuel consumption and reducing CO2 contributing to global warming.

A Seattle Dept of Transportation Map shows that the average figure for traffic going through the Battery Street Tunnel is 60,000 cars per day. The traffic on the South part of the Viaduct by Spokane Street is also only 60,000. These are two constrictor points.

In the center of the Viaduct a figure of 110,000 vehicles is usually given. The question is how much of this figure is a short on and off travel figure or a pass through that could go elsewhere. What is the traffic flow of these 50,000 vehicles?

Even using these numbers to support rebuilding a Luxury viaduct are misleading. They are actually the wrong numbers to look at.

The important question to ask is, what is the hourly traffic each hour during the day using the viaduct? What time is the highest per hour capacity now and what are the alternatives that might lower that peak capacity travel? How many park and rides and buses could we fund with $2 to $3 billion dollars to reduce that peak capacity?

We obviously don’t need a 110,000 capacity corridor for 24 hours, 7 days a week. For most times a lesser capacity option would work. That is unless our goal is to increase traffic flow through this corridor with more air pollution and noise.

So then what is this huge luxury viaduct being built for – for maybe 20 peak hours of travel – 2 morning and 2 evening rush hour traffic flows during the weekdays? Obviously Saturday and Sunday traffic flows are different. Saturday and Sunday traffic wouldn’t warrant such a large capacity. And traffic flows in the night are not much.

Building a 110,000 vehicle/day capacity is like buying a huge truck because maybe once a month you need to haul something. Why not buy a small fuel efficient car for most of your travel and rent a truck those few times you need to haul something? Its the same with the traffic corridor in question, why not built it for smaller capacity that meets 90% of the travel needs? And look for solutions to address the remaining 10%.

For those few hours of peak capacity, how about increased bus traffic – maybe even free bus passes from new park and ride lots north and south of the viaduct? You can give out lots of free bus passes for a billion dollars, and reduce traffic noise and congestion and cut air pollution.

It’s what happens now with special buses to sports events. What’s so different about having “special buses” to zip people to work downtown who now use the viaduct? I know this is a pretty radical idea. Since trips to work are round trips 10,000 people using the bus means 20,000 fewer car trips. 50 people in a bus means 50 fewer cars at the same time. How about some car pooling.

Another way to check the true need for the viaduct capacity is to start charging tolls and then see how many people still use the corridor. Charge car pools or van pools less or let them pass through free. Tolls have been mentioned as one way to help pay for transportation infrastructure and what better way to see how many would pay a toll to use the Viaduct corridor than to start now. The initial toll could be used to build a fund to tear down the viaduct.

Seems to me to be a legitimate way to use the tolls. And the concept of user pay is fair. If you don’t use it, why should you pay for it?

We’re going to have to tear the viaduct down anyway so why not do it now. Then see how many people clamor to rebuild it. You might be surprised how many would look to different solutions than those proposed now. Too bad we can’t plan for an earthquake at 3 AM sometime soon to speed up the tear down process.