“The Greatest Shortcoming of the Human Race is our Inability to Understand The Exponential Function” – Dr. Albert A. Bartlett

Notwithstanding all the controversy over the effects of climate change from “the blind leading the blind”, isn’t it time we remember the dramatist and epigrammatist John Heywood’s declaration of 1546, when he wrote “Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and haue your cake?”. (“You can’t have your cake and eat it too”)

It’s time to demonstrate moral responsibility for the control factors involved in our survival as a species while considering our course of action as no more or less than better risk management.

We can not take “a rain check” as an excuse when faced with the realities of current available energy resources and the consequences of their depletion.

Regardless of the truths about climate change we need new economical energy technology solutions now!

“Scary”

To mitigate the growing cost of maintaining public utilities with continued demand on public resources, and offset environmental damage and it’s human effect on available resources and health, doesn’t it make sense to move to technologies that are more cost efficient and less stress on the global community.

I have to wonder why these two Australian solutions seem overlooked, they have been in the public eye for some time. Both these solutions allow the consumer to take control of their own energy needs reducing concern by the community. Creating more time that could be best served working on tasks of higher value.

Something definitely needs stimulating, and I doubt it’s our financial community.

The Self Sustaining Magnetic Power Generator

We can thank Lutec Australia PTY Ltd. for ten years of hard work creating their Magnetic Electric Generator that outputs 1250 watts while consuming only 210 watts. That’s an amplification of 6 times consumption. These units can be ganged together to produce 2.5, 5, 7.5, or 10 kilowatts and each 10 kilowatt unit can be ganged to create multiples of ten up to several hundred kilowatts, enough to supply homes and business needs.

The Self Sustaining Lutec Generator

Manufacturers from all over the world are invited to express interest in license purchase of the Lutec Generator now distributed as EEA (Evergreen Electricity Amplifier) by www.evergreenltd.com.hk.

Currently patented across Africa and in fourteen other nations with pending approval in another seven nations www.evergreenltd.com.hk/patents.htm

Scaleable for home and small commercial installations as well as large utility size distribution nodes. Energy produced at no cost to the supplier or the environment, and for those that buy their own units, free electric power for the life of the unit.

Image Projection of the One Megawatt Mini Power Station

We could declare we are not totally convinced disruptive technologies are necessary. We may even feel we have been coerced by our trusted Intellectual elite. Possibly some may even believe there is a dark sinister plot afoot to control the masses with fear of a climate disaster. The whole concept of unlimited clean free energy for everyone makes it a non question in my assessment.

So what’s the worst that can happen if we ignore the possibilities and not re-adapt and make ready for the “unexpected”.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Most Terrifying Video You’ll Ever See

The Toothless Tiger…

“Consensus and Egalitarianism”, are hard to find.

The evening of the final day

Tim Jones climate policy officer from World Development Movement, “This summit has been a complete disarray from start to finish, and now appears to be culminating in a shameful and monumental failure that will condemn millions of people around the world to untold suffering. The leaders of rich countries have refused to lead and instead sought to bribe and bully developing nations to sign up to the equivalent of a death warrant.”

Obama seeks another meeting with China’s representative Wen.

Mid evening

Indian minister for the environment and forests Jairam Ramesh, “We are close to seeing a legally non-binding Copenhagen outcome after 36 hours of gruelling, intensive negotiations.”

Sky News reports a “meaningful agreement” with China, India and South Africa.

A Downing Street official says, “there’s been more movement this evening and we’re hopeful a deal can be done tonight. Final details are still being nailed down but we are now confident we can get the two degree target agreed.” “The time has come to get off the sidelines and shape the future that we seek”
“I believe what we have achieved in Copenhagen will not be the end but the beginning”

As we head into a long night session

Barack Obama, speaks during the plenary session at the Bella centre in Copenhagen on the final day of the COP15 UN climate change conference. Photograph: Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images

Obama, “Everybody’s taking as aggressive actions as they can.” “The most important thing I think we can do…is to build some trust between the developed and developing countries.” “Getting out of that mindset and moving towards the position where everybody recognises that we all need to move together.” “This is hard within countries, it is going to be even harder between countries”

Obama, “we need to strive for a more binding agreement over time.”

Tim Jones, climate policy officer at the World Development Movement,  “This summit has been in complete disarray from start to finish, culminating in a shameful and monumental failure that has condemned millions of people around the world to untold suffering. The leaders of rich countries have refused to lead. They have failed the poorest people in the world and history will judge them harshly because rich countries are trying to blind us to the fact that they have not offered the emissions cuts that science and justice requires. To say that this deal is in any way historic or meaningful is to completely misrepresent the fact that this deal is devoid of real content. These talks have been darkened by rich countries trying to save face, but not the climate. Rich countries have caused this problem and now they are trying to blame developing countries for stalling the talks because they are standing up to these insulting and outrageous bribes. The very survival of some of these countries depends on the outcomes of these talks but rich countries cannot see beyond the survival of business as usual.”

Obama praises five leaders, Meles (Ethiopia), Wen (China), Singh (India), Lula (Brazil) and Zuma (South Africa). And called the deal on the table “an important milestone” also admitting “This progress is not enough.” “We have come a long way but we have much further to go.” “We must draw on the effort that allowed us to succeed here today.” “We must bridge old divides and build new partnerships.” “The time has come to get off the sidelines and shape the future that we seek.” “I believe what we have achieved in Copenhagen will not be the end but the beginning.”

Obama, most significant is the “shift in orientation” with developing countries voluntarily offering emmision cuts, “That’s what I think will end up being most significant about this accord.”

Asad Rehman, Friends of the Earth’s biofuels campaigner, “I think its a toothless document between 4 countries [It stood] being spun by the US as a success but in reality does the exact opposite.” “We wouldn’t call it a historic step.” “This is a tragedy for the people of the world and for the planet.” “The EU should have played a much more constructive role.”

Kate Horner, Friends of the Earth, “This is the United Nations and the nations here are not united on this secret backroom declaration. The US has lied to the world when they called it a deal and they lied to over a hundred countries when they said would listen to their needs. This toothless declaration, being spun by the US as an historic success, reflects contempt for the multilateral process and we expect more from our Nobel prize winning President.”

Obama, “We know the targets will not by themselves get us where we need to be by 2050 but it’s a first step. The science dictates that even more needs to be done.”

Senior climate change advocacy officer for Christian Aid, Nelson Muffuh, “Already 300,000 people die each year because of the impact of climate change, most of them in the developing world. The lack of ambition shown by rich countries in Copenhagen means that number will grow.”

EU spokeswoman, “A deal is better than no deal. What could be agreed today, falls far below our expectations. But It keeps our goals and ambitions alive. It addresses the needs of developing countries. It was the only deal available in Copenhagen.”

Brazil’s climate change ambassador Sergio Serra, “It’s very disappointing I would say but it is not a failure…if we agree to meet again and deal with the issues that are still pending.”

John Sauven, Executive director Greenpeace UK, “It seems there are too few politicians in this world capable of looking beyond the horizon of their own narrow self-interest, let alone caring much for the millions of people who are facing down the threat of climate change.” “It is now evident that beating global warming will require a radically different model of politics than the one on display here in Copenhagen”

John Ashe, Chair of Kyoto Protocol talks, “Given where we started and the expectations for this conference, anything less than a legally binding and agreed outcome falls far short of the mark.”

Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, “The world’s nations have come together and concluded a historic if incomplete agreement to begin tackling global warming.” “President Obama and the rest of the world paid a steep price here in Copenhagen because of obstructionism in the United States Senate.”

John Lanchbery, Birdlife International, “It sounds very vague. There’s no next step, nothing to link through to how to get a final deal done.”

Lumumba Di-Aping, chief negotiator for the G77 group of 130 developing countries, “This deal will definitely result in massive devastation in Africa and small island states. It has the lowest level of ambition you can imagine. It’s nothing short of climate change scepticism in action.” “It locks countries into a cycle of poverty for ever. Obama has eliminated any difference between him and Bush.”

The Morning News

Lumumba Di-Aping, chief negotiator for the G77 group of 130 developing countries remarked the deal had,  “the lowest level of ambition you can imagine. It’s nothing short of climate change scepticism in action. It locks countries into a cycle of poverty for ever. Obama has eliminated any difference between him and Bush.”

John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK,  “The city of Copenhagen is a crime scene tonight, with the guilty men and women fleeing to the airport. Ed Miliband [UK climate change secretary] is among the very few that come out of this summit with any credit.” It is now evident that beating global warming will require a radically different model of politics than the one on display here in Copenhagen.”

Lydia Baker of Save the Children about world leaders, “They have effectively signed a death warrant for many of the world’s poorest children. Up to 250,000 children from poor communities could die before the next major meeting in Mexico at the end of next year.”

At the meeting of December the 14th, Sudan’s negotiator, Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, summed up the African position, saying, “We shall not participate in any negotiations until the issues of the Kyoto Protocol are discussed…that was one issue. The second issue is who draws up the outcome…We do not want the conference to adopt or present a draft that is not drafted by the parties to the convention. The third issue centres around the process, the transparency and the democratic right of equal participation of all member states who are parties to this convention.”

Climate Summit Ends

Delegates applaud as the Copenhagen accord is adopted after an all-night plenary meeting at the UN Climate Change Conference. Photograph: Reuters

Recognized but not endorsed by 193 countries we are looking at a new global climate change deal described by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon as an “essential” first step

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon emphasized the agreement, now only three pages, must be made legally binding late next year.

The Convention finished at about 11.30am.

Copenhagen Day 1…

The opening ceremony kick-off movie

Opening remarks, and some highlights of day one…

“Climategate” skeptics made some noise….

The make or break issue is clearly “burden sharing“. When sovereignty and the needs of survival find themselves up against it, and facing complications of long term responsibility, who would settle for an artificially created economic caste system. The need to retain sovereignty, and the finances to harmonize all morally must be respected and provided.

Among the more than 15,000 accredited and 20,000 civil participants in Copenhagen to be part of the negotiations of a successor to the Kyoto Protocol are Environment Ministers, activists, heads of state, functionaries, and scientists .

Copenhagen Day 2…

Some highlights from day two of the conference…

The question of  responsibility for climate change among the G77 is paramount.

Disarray over a leaked proposal by Denmark would have the World Bank in charge of climate funds, hand over more power to rich nations, weaken the UN’s role and abandon the binding agreements of the Kyoto protocol.

Developing countries interpret the proposal document to set unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions.

Drafted by “the circle of commitment” including the UK, US, and Denmark the proposal has been shown to a handful of countries.

The document relieves rich nations from their commitment to the Kyoto Protocol, and talks of a range of concomitant actions for poorer developing nations, to qualify for climate change financial assistance.

The document is seen as very dangerous by one diplomat who describes it as “a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks”.

THE AFTER DEAL…

Not part of the original deal developing countries would be forced to agree to specific emission cuts. Listing some countries in a new category “the most vulnerable”. lt further divides poor developing countries. Climate finance will be less a UN concern and be administrated by the World Bank.  A final untenable outrage, poorer countries can not emit more than 1.44 tones of carbon per person by 2050. The rich 2.67 tones per person.  A good beginning for a climate caste system.

It’s interesting how wealth can make some feel “god like”…

One diplomat said to want to remain nameless claims the documents introduction is the end of the UN process.

Climate policy adviser Antonio Hill,  for Oxfam International, said: “This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed. It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Program] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks.”

Considered inflammatory by sidelining the UN and proposing a new separate working framework for rich countries as yet it’s sketchy at best. When considering the equality of human rights, a clear cause for concern. The concept of “climate induced slavery” comes to mind.

More than the 15,000 participants to the conference, a number closer to 35,000 participants has arrived in Copenhagen to participate in many ways.

Developed nations were criticized for not living up to their historic climate debt. Complaints of lack of transparency were heard. “Climatgate” got blamed on a Russian hacker who informed the Russian Secret Service of his stolen material. Professor Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, the vice chairman of the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, said theory is Russia would like to see talks fail, wanting global warming to facilitate exploration and development of it’s far north.

Copenhagen Day 3

The Danish Text…

Business of the day for Kenya and other developing countries…

Battle lines drawn…

Questions of the day included responsibility for CO2 emissions, who should pay, how much technology and know-how should be transferred to poorer nations, and is forest protection a viable solution.

Britain, Australia, Mexico, and Norway presented a fund raising proposal for the billions needed to mitigate and adapt to the emerging climate condition. Australia spoke in favor of the 10 billion a year green fund to help poor vulnerable countries. Because of internal strife it’s not quite clear yet where India stands in the negotiations. Britain attacks the “climategate” faction with substantive proof that the first decade of the new millennium is on average the warmest in 160 years.

On a brighter note, the U.S. Environmental Agency’s decided to label CO2 as unhealthy. Presidential powers can now set binding CO2 goals regardless of other levels of government.

Copenhagen Day 4

Kenya’s works at reaching a single minded position…

Suspension of negotiations…

After a highly unusual split within the developing countries assembled, the island state of Tuvalu asked for and got a suspension of climate negotiations to resolve issues behind the scene on Wednesday.

AOSIS Proposal for KP Survival and New en Protocol – Final

Developing countries are split on demands and ask for protocols tougher than Kyoto. Richer nations are opposed to the idea. Developing countries argue for an extension of the Kyoto Protocols to run concurrent with a new tougher legally binding protocol.

China, India, and South Africa felt it would retard their economic growth.

With support from members of AOSIS (Association of Small Island States) Tuvalu called for a “Contact Group” and has been blocked. The conference will not proceed until all parties resolve how to proceed.

Copenhagen Day 5…

Highlights, EU commits 2.4 billion Euros…

Climate in turmoil…

African delegates threaten walkout…

Copenhagen Day 6…

Highlights and First Official Draft of the Proposed Climate Deal…

Copenhagen Day 7…

We are confronted by Winter cold, A lot of discord within the Bella Center, and protests, arrests, and cries for climate justice from the people outside the Bella Center.

Copenhagen Day 8…

Day 8, Highlights Report Alarming Update on Melting Ice…

Copenhagen Day 9…

Highlights, I’ll Be Back…

Connie Hedegaard resigns as president of the Copenhagen climate summit.

Copenhagen Day 10…

Difficult Negotiations in Copenhagen…

Many Christians remember growing up with a Papal edict to eat fish on Friday. It’s now being suggested by some that we abstain from meat one or more days a week to reduce the methane pollution from meat production, now indicated to be a more serious problem than fossil fuel consumption by all modes of transport.

So how is it going?…

Global leaders arriving to sign the climate deal now find they have to shift thinking globally rather than nationally in efforts to salvage agreement.

Copenhagen Day 11…

Heads Of State Arrive To Save The Climate

Copenhagen, The Final Day

The diplomatic words spoken in these huge plenary sessions and behind the closed doors will determine the survival of entire nations and environments on which many more depend. Will this be man’s noblest and finest hour?

Time is running out in Copenhagen…

Time is running out continued…

Many delegates worked into the small hours of the morning to resolve their dead locks. Confidential UN analysis shows that current offers on the table are agreed, global temperatures will rise on average by 3C.

early morning; a German Negotiator “There is still no text for the heads of state to negotiate,” the official told Reuters. “There are no results on anything. We have only several drafts. It’s very, very difficult. Time is running out.” Swedish environment minister Andreas Carlgren “It is now up to world leaders to decide.” Chinese delegate, Li Junhua “It’s a political statement, but it isn’t a lot.” Sudan’s Lumumba Di-Aping, stated the current draft being discussed is “weak”. He added: “There’s nothing ambitious in this text.”

Mid- morning

Senior White House correspondent, Ed Henry, says Obama has ripped up his schedule to try and broker a deal, tweeting that Obama is in negotiations with Australia, UK, Brazil, France, Denmark, Germany, EU, Japan, Bangladesh,Russia, South Africa, India, Mexico, Spain, South Korea, Norway, Colombia, and Ethiopia (representing China).

Filling in for Obama Danish prime minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen, “Today doesn’t mark the end or our work, but the beginning.”

Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, “The finishing line is sight, our discussions are bearing fruit.”

Chinese premier Wen Jiabao, “China takes climate change very seriously.” “Our target [for cuts] will be included in our long-term plans.” A promise from Wen, “China will honour its voluntary climate commitments with real action.”

Late morning

Activists outside shave their heads littering the entrance way with hair in protest of the slow call to action from the delegates.

Obama from the floor, “This is not fiction it is science. Unchecked climate change will pose unacceptable risk to security, economy and planet,” “Our ability to take collective action is in doubt.” “We’re running out of time.” “We will do what we say, now its time for the nations of the world to come to a common purpose.” “Our ability to take collective action is in the balance.”

Early Afternoon

Andy Atkins, executive director of Friends of the Earth, ” The President is right that the endeavours in Copenhagen will go down in history – but unless we see a massive shift in the US position, it will be for all the wrong reasons. If the President’s idea of action is to cut US emissions by 4% on 1990 levels then we’re heading for climate catastrophe. Barack Obama should have taken the opportunity to up his proposed cuts to at least 40% by 2020 and ditch carbon offsetting. Obama has deeply disappointed not just those listening to his speech at the UN talks – he has disappointed the whole world.”

Greenpeace US’s executive director Phil Radford, “The world was waiting for the spirit of yes we can, but all we got was my way or the highway. He [Obama] crossed an ocean to tell the world he has nothing new to offer, then he said take it or leave it. By offering no movement on US global warming pollution cuts he showed his disregard for the science and the victims of climate change in the United States and abroad. He now risks being branded as the man who killed Copenhagen. He said all parties must move, but he offered no movement. He said the decades long split between the rich world and poor needs to end, but his vision of a deal here would give us a 3C temperature rise and devastate Africa and the small island states.”

ActionAid’s climate expert, Raman Mehta, “Obama has said nothing to save the Copenhagen conference from failure. The US is the one major player yet to move. Developing countries have come here to negotiate in good faith but feel they have been cheated and it looks like they will leave empty handed.

The UN has reportedly advised negotiators to extend their stays until Sunday night.

John Vidal referring to the draft text, “Their initial reaction was that it was not only weak on figures and targets, but that it could lead to the collapse of the Kyoto treaty, the only global legal instrument requiring rich countries to cut emissions.”

Hugo Chávez, the president of Venezuela won’t support the deal currently being “cooked up”. Chávez   leaving in protest at the failure of the talks. “We can’t wait any longer, we are leaving. We will reject any document that Obama tries to slip under the door.”

French president Nicolas Sarkozy, “The discussions lasted all night without interruption. The good news is that they’re continuing, the bad news is they haven’t reached a conclusion.”

China’s Wen Jiabao, “We will honour our words with real action. We commit to meet and even exceed our target.”

Mid-afternoon

It’s official says European Union environment commissioner Stavros Dima, “The secretary-general of the UN has asked people not to leave tonight.” “I cannot imagine 120 leaders going back to their countries with empty hands. Everyone expressed commitment to fight climate change. OK, do it.”

Talk of a new draft to be called the “Copenhagen Accord” emerges. It drops any reference to a deadline of the end of 2010 for a legally binding treaty.

climate campaigner Joss Garman, “This latest draft is so weak as to be meaningless. It’s more like a G8 communique than the legally binding agreement we need. It doesn’t even include a time line to give it legal standing or an explicit temperature target. It’s hard to imagine our leaders will try to present this document to the world and keep a straight face.”

A Third Draft

reinstates targets omitted from earlier ones. It says rich countries should reduce their greenhouse emissions by at least 80% by the year 2050. It adds that developing countries’ emissions should be 15-30% below “business as usual”.

Watch the proceedings live from The Bella Center Copenhagen

How will the “Gordian Knot” be resolved to the satisfaction of all.

Fast, Clean, & Cheap Cutting Glo –

The future fortune of nations hangs in the balance of their actions today. Nothing less than compassion and fair treatment for all is acceptable. Only open dialoge and democratic acceptance can be tolerated.

Tick Tock, Tick Tock, Tick Tock… The Climate Clock… What Does It Matter?

Some say ‘pretext’ for ‘change’, others an outright scam to strengthen position, thus enabling the initialization of world government, a ‘New World Order’.

Or, a weak gambit to forestall the inevitable…

We all know ‘trust’ amongst humanity has by long standing been hard won. But what is the real question here? In principle how will acceptance or rejection of the Copenhagen Proposal affect our human rights and quality of living.

A Canadian’s Perspective

Click here to view the embedded video.

Obama, Harper and Copenhagen Pt.2

Click here to view the embedded video.

When does “Same as it ever was…” become an obstacle to honest healthy growth? What do we do about it?

I need to qualify this blogs position. It’s never been overly concerned with government or climate change, although it is concerned if political parties or financial markets leverage climate change for their own purpose at the expense of humanity as a whole.

The only real concern here is innovation capable of leading to unlimited clean free power for all. If a cleaner more wholesome environment happens to be a benefit of the revolution in technology, all the better for us considering our growing numbers.

It’s not about you or me, and definitely not about tribal, national organizational movements, revolutionary groups, cliques,  or fiscal bottom-lines!

Beyond any possible word jugglery or concoction, it’s about ‘what’s right’ for long term sustainability of our only planet, and us.

Holding onto old paradigms for the sake of allegiances were research and development is possible, is immature use or management of available knowledge and natural resources. Technological changes can and should be taking place. Among the many new technologies mentioned on this blog, magnetic technology, has been declared practical by a major world corporation that on record stating bluntly, magnetic technology can replace fossil based fuel, rendering fuel costs ‘no longer necessary’ but no one is going to go up against big energy as it is today.

Good common sense is quick to relieve burdens.  Imagine a world with small public distribution utilities to manage public utility power distribution, and without a personal power bill. Devices have been design tested all over the world that could make it possible. Is it not sensible in these times to investigate and act on the intelligence available, removing our footprint, cleaning our environment in the process.

If there is any truth to the assertion of Kjell Aleklett, professor of physics at Uppsala and co-author of “The Peak of the Oil Age”, a new report which claims the IEA’s World Energy Report (2009) prediction of 105 million barrels by 2030 is a gross exaggeration. Kjell Aleklett says the report, should more likley be closer to 75 million barrels a day. It appears new innovations are propitious anyway.

Scientifically, what will cleaner technologies enable?…  A lessened human control factor!

Whatever the benefit, it will be worth the effort in the future. Without the proper oxygen count in the air and clean water we die. In ages past the oxygen level in the air was scientifically proven to be higher, and water purer, than in what we ourselves define as ‘polluted’ skies and waterway today.

Rather than focusing on illusive numbers  representing tipping factors, within a gamut of control factors, no one can honestly correlate too any significant depth to determine current trends evolving from the chaos and growing populous. Shouldn’t we be focused on improving our global quality of life beyond the concerns of the day, especially those related to power brokering and wealth building as prime motivator, and rather than continuing to dabble in carbon indulgences. Consensus found appears artificial and full of supposition and conjecture at best.  Some, now  use the term ‘Climategate’ to describe the fray.

The danger; possible loss of objective approach to the real issues of long term sustainability, environment and natural resources…

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The call was answered all around the world. Groups formed an action on October 24 incorporating the number 350 at an iconic place in their communities, and then uploaded a video of their event to 350.org…

350.org collected these images from around the world , with your help, delivering them to the media and world leaders. Together, we can show our world and it’s decision-makers just how big, beautiful, and unified the climate movement really is.

To help on October 24’s international day of climate action, 350.org:

• communicated public awareness of the need for an international climate treaty to reach 350
• Assembled a coalition of hundreds of organizations committed to this vision of a more sustainable world
• Connected you with others in your community and across the planet who are building this movement
• Provided on-line resources and tools that make pulling together an event easy
• Linked your October 24 event with hundreds of other actions at iconic places around the world
• Leveraged the day of action for meaningful political change

Click here to view the embedded video.

Witness The Determination

Click here to view the embedded video.

Don’t Allow This To Happen

Click here to view the embedded video.

Or

Click here to view the embedded video.

Many In Body, One In Mind… It’s Time To Make A Stand.

Supplementing For The Human Control Factors

The Question remains!

No mater how you look at it. Becoming climate neutral is crucial to humanities survival.

What does it matter if “our footprint” as a civilization is contributing to global warming or global cooling? What does it matter if the science is absolute when determining civilizations effect, or the cyclical cycle of increased solar spot activity effect?

Some say empirical evidence,  from both written and geologic records, indicates global temperature modulates in cycles of warming and cooling, with 57 degrees Fahrenheit  as the normal mean temperature throughout a continuing 4500 year cycle. The current conjecture is, we may reach it’s recent past height set in 1100 B.C., again around 2030. There is also conjecture that the many volcano eruptions over past recorded history also played a role in rapid global temperature change.

In our time, a most significant climate control factor is human population .

Display created by Ed Stephan http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/

“A scientific report commissioned by the US government has concluded there is “clear evidence” of climate change caused by human activities. The report, from the federal Climate Change Science Program, said trends seen over the last 50 years “cannot be explained by natural processes alone”. It found that temperatures have increased in the lower atmosphere as well as at the Earth’s surface.”¹

“The human population growth of the last century has been truly phenomenal. It required only 40 years after 1950 for the population to double from 2.5 billion to 5 billion. This doubling time is less than the average human lifetime. The world population passed 6 billion just before the end of the 20th century. Present estimates are for the population to reach 8-12 billion before the end of the 21st century. During each lecture hour, more than 10,000 new people enter the world, a rate of ~3 per second!

Of the 6 billion people, about half live in poverty and at least one fifth are severely undernourished. The rest live out their lives in comparative comfort and health.

The factors affecting global human population are very simple. They are fertility, mortality, initial population, and time. The current growth rate of ~1.3% per year is smaller than the peak which occurred a few decades ago (~2.1% per year in 1965-1970), but since this rate acts on a much larger population base, the absolute number of new people per year (~90 million) is at an all time high.”²

Hypothetically, If someone were to survive climate collapse, and in retrospect using simple minded deductions, look back and note that population has always been on the increase, and eventually we would be where we are today anyway; who could fault them after every possible stone was turned as first president in the effort to stem the tide.

Nature has it’s own way of maintaining balance.

Species responsibility demands action and movement toward human climate neutrality.

We face the evident melting polar and glacier ice, rising oceans, the real threat of disappearing sovereign nations (The Maldives), disappearing rivers, great rivers no longer reaching the sea, lack of fresh water, over use of non-renewable aquifers, disappearing streams and empty wells, deforestation, dying species both plant and animal, over use of available land, food shortage, homeless starving people, sickness, and death.

“What is really interesting at the moment is what is happening to our oceans. They are the Earth’s great heat stores. Pacific ocean (BBC) In the last few years [the Pacific Ocean] has been losing its warmth and has recently started to cool down.

According to research conducted by Professor Don Easterbrook from Western Washington University last November, the oceans and global temperatures are correlated. The oceans, he says, have a cycle in which they warm and cool cyclically. The most important one is the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO).

For much of the 1980s and 1990s, it was in a positive cycle, that means warmer than average. And observations have revealed that global temperatures were warm too. But in the last few years it has been losing its warmth and has recently started to cool down.

These cycles in the past have lasted for nearly 30 years.

So could global temperatures follow? The global cooling from 1945 to 1977 coincided with one of these cold Pacific cycles. Professor Easterbrook says: “The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling.”

So what does it all mean? Climate change sceptics argue that this is evidence that they have been right all along. They say there are so many other natural causes for warming and cooling, that even if man is warming the planet, it is a small part compared with nature.

But those scientists who are equally passionate about man’s influence on global warming argue that their science is solid.

The UK Met Office’s Hadley Centre, responsible for future climate predictions, says it incorporates solar variation and ocean cycles into its climate models, and that they are nothing new. In fact, the centre says they are just two of the whole host of known factors that influence global temperatures – all of which are accounted for by its models.

In addition, say Met Office scientists, temperatures have never increased in a straight line, and there will always be periods of slower warming, or even temporary cooling. What is crucial, they say, is the long-term trend in global temperatures. And that, according to the Met office data, is clearly up.

To confuse the issue even further, last month Mojib Latif, a member of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) says that we may indeed be in a period of cooling worldwide temperatures that could last another 10-20 years. Iceberg melting (BBC)

The UK Met Office says that warming is set to resume

Professor Latif is based at the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences at Kiel University in Germany and is one of the world’s top climate modellers. But he makes it clear that he has not become a sceptic; he believes that this cooling will be temporary, before the overwhelming force of man-made global warming reasserts itself.

So what can we expect in the next few years?

Both sides have very different forecasts. The Met Office says that warming is set to resume quickly and strongly. It predicts that from 2010 to 2015 at least half the years will be hotter than the current hottest year on record (1998).

Sceptics disagree. They insist it is unlikely that temperatures will reach the dizzy heights of 1998 until 2030 at the earliest. It is possible, they say, that because of ocean and solar cycles a period of global cooling is more likely.

One thing is for sure. It seems the debate about what is causing global warming is far from over. Indeed some would say it is hotting up.”³

A Possible Small Window of Opportunity…

“Air pollution can affect our health in many ways with both short-term and long-term effects. Different groups of individuals are affected by air pollution in different ways. Some individuals are much more sensitive to pollutants than are others. Young children and elderly people often suffer more from the effects of air pollution. People with health problems such as asthma, heart and lung disease may also suffer more when the air is polluted. The extent to which an individual is harmed by air pollution usually depends on the total exposure to the damaging chemicals, i.e., the duration of exposure and the concentration of the chemicals must be taken into account.

Examples of short-term effects include irritation to the eyes, nose and throat, and upper respiratory infections such as bronchitis and pneumonia. Other symptoms can include headaches, nausea, and allergic reactions. Short-term air pollution can aggravate the medical conditions of individuals with asthma and emphysema. In the great “Smog Disaster” in London in 1952, four thousand people died in a few days due to the high concentrations of pollution.

Long-term health effects can include chronic respiratory disease, lung cancer, heart disease, and even damage to the brain, nerves, liver, or kidneys. Continual exposure to air pollution affects the lungs of growing children and may aggravate or complicate medical conditions in the elderly. It is estimated that half a million people die prematurely every year in the United States as a result of smoking cigarettes.”⁴

Much of  the carbon culture or climate, smells of “dirty business” who’s only aim is turning scarcity into abundance at the expense of the whole. Where is the value in that? …

We have knowledge of known unused, and new developing technologies that can make “Our Energy Climate Change Footprint” a non issue.

Is it not true; the continued development, production, and distribution of  such technologies themselves would produce abundance beyond measure…

Re-write the future…

All anyone needs for growth is food for nourishment, a place of rest and good association.

Do we fade away, or live to give another day?

Climate Change…

The Anatomy Of A Silent Crisis

Click here to view the embedded video.

For publication I am compiling a  list of past, current, developed, and promising, free energy technologies that could serve to reduce the human climate effect.  Send your list of clean energy technologies for compiling and presentation before Copenhagen to clean@environmentaide.org

Many remember first hearing of the wonders of magnetic propulsion, when The first commercial Maglev “people-mover” became a carrier  in 1984 in Birmingham, England. Other stator driven applications could include automobiles, trucks, and boats… Howard Johnson inventor of Spintronics, a unique magnetic gate which  formed the basis of many of his successful motors, was fond of saying “conventional magnetic theory and the real magnetic theory are about as much alike as a Venetian Blind is to a blind Venetian.”

Maglev Train – complete video presentation

From The Republic of  Georgia, Russian inventor, Tariel Kapanadze and his group have come up with one of many promising devices to aide in our move to clean free energy for all. This one capable of capturing enough zero point energy or free energy from the wheelworks of nature to power 60 homes… Perhaps not very much fun to watch, but proven possible…

Kapanadze’s third-party testing 100 kW free energy device

Click here to view the embedded video.

This solution was found in a few minutes on the Internet. How many can you find? Combustion technologies can become a thing of the past, and the CO2 from a summer campfire a harmless pastime.

In the words of Author, Scientist, Former Astronaut, and International Speaker Dr. Brian O’Leary…  “Earlier in 2009,  the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) solicited concept papers for funding innovative energy technology research and development.  Some of us who have followed free energy developments were cautiously optimistic about these developments, because, up until now, the DoE has been in denial about anything beyond solar and wind, and even spends a pittance on the traditional renewables compared to the untold hundreds of billions of dollars they spend on research on fossil fuel technologies (hydrocarbons) and nuclear power and nuclear weapons.

So my colleague Wade Frazier and I decided to draft a concept paper to the DoE. Our idea was really quite simple: (1) poll the American public about their attitudes toward the POSSIBILITY of a breakthrough decentralized clean energy economy and making the transition from our current polluting multi-trillion dollar energy mix as painless as possible; and (2) advising the DoE about the most promising R&D options, and safe implementation and transition strategies, free of vested interests.  Part of our philosophy in designing this task was that, by its very nature, if our future energy were to be truly “free,” then our own effort should be of minimal cost for the taxpayer.  We therefore asked for $1 (plus occasional travel, as needed) to support our proposed task.

Needless to say, the proposal was turned down, but we can only hope that some technologies will be supported by the DoE under this program.  Or is this effort just another attempt to cover up the most promising technologies?  Time will tell.”

“If we become increasingly humble about how little we know, we may be more eager to search.” ~ Sir John Templeton

“We have come to this Rock, to record here our homage for our Pilgrim fathers; our sympathy in their sufferings; our gratitude for their labors; Our admiration of their virtues; our veneration for their piety; and our attachment to those principles of civil and religious liberty, which they encountered, the dangers of the ocean, the storms of heaven, the violence of savages, disease, exile, and famine, to enjoy and establish.

And we would leave here, also, for the generations which are rising up rapidly to fill our places, some proof, that we have endeavored to transmit the great inheritance unimpaired; that in our estimate of public principles, and Private virtue; in our veneration of religion and piety; in our devotion to civil and religious liberty; in our regard to whatever advances human Knowledge, or improves human happiness, we are not altogether unworthy of our origin.” –Daniel Webster

WE CAN IF WE TRY!

YES WE CAN!

Remember

Or is it a Factor of a much bigger problem?

“If we become increasingly humble about how little we know,

we may be more eager to search.” ~ Sir John Templeton

“Monday’s Wake Up call was unbelievable – 2632 events in 134 countries, tens of thousands of phone calls crashing government lines, unbelievable creativity and diversity of events, directly reaching heads of state and cabinet ministers from Australia to Europe.

Avaaz.org – The World in Action The Wake Up call was covered by hundreds of major news outlets and made the evening news everywhere from Germany to New Zealand. Europe’s environment chief praised “the mobilization of so many people by Avaaz.org”, the UK Prime Minister became the first major world leader to agree to our demand to go to Copenhagen and said that with “the pressure that can be brought by organizations like yours…what people think is impossible can become possible”. The Spanish environment minister called the action “extraordinary”.

World leaders have heard us. But as Tuesday’s UN summit showed, one day of action won’t be enough to get real progress on climate. We need to come back again and again, louder and louder, until we get a fair, ambitious and binding climate treaty.

We’ll keep the pressure high through the TCKTCKTCK campaign until Copenhagen, with another global day of action on October 24th, and start planning right now for the LARGEST CLIMATE MOBILIZATION IN HISTORY ON DECEMBER 12th, in the final days of the Copenhagen negotiations.

Avaaz.org – The World in ActionAvaaz is now 3.6 million members strong in 14 languages, in every country of the world. On Monday, our movement took a huge step forward — we showed that we can not only send millions of messages to leaders or donate millions to worthy causes, but that in just a few days we can flood the streets and crash phone lines from Mexico City to Mumbai.¹

The video above was made from over 10,000 wake up call pictures and 600 videos uploaded to Avaaz in just 24 hours!

 G8 fails on climate goals. Again!

 Ban Ki-moon declares, the G8 leaders of the rich world are failing at shouldering their "historical responsibilities"

A large percentage of the population  today are so captivated by the artificial life the modern age has created they have become disconnected from the natural mother that feeds and cloths us,  they’ve lost their sense of it.

Can you call what’s happened lately to our world economy any less than the "tyranny of the drunken monkey", yet more business interests became representation in government in the aftermath.

I can’t help wondering what Solan, the Athenian Archon, statesman, lawmaker, and Lyric poet, also considered the first father of modern democracy, who wrote for pleasure poetry as patriotic propaganda and in defense of his constitutional reforms, would say.

In Solon’s time, Athens was under constant threat from the unrestrained greed and arrogance of its citizens. He declared "Even the earth (Gaia), the mighty mother of the gods, has been enslaved."

He is most remembered for his reform abolishing usury. Usury (in the original sense of any interest) was at times denounced by a number of religious leaders and philosophers in the ancient world, including Plato, Aristotle, Cato, Cicero, Seneca, Plutarch, Aquinas, Muhammad, Moses, Philo and Gautama Buddha.

The G8 and developing countries declaration on climate change states.

"We, the leaders of Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States met as the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate in L’Aquila, Italy, on July 9, 2009, and declare as follows:

Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time.

As leaders of the world’s major economies, both developed and developing, we intend to respond vigorously to this challenge, being convinced that climate change poses a clear danger requiring an extraordinary global response, that the response should respect the priority of economic and social development of developing countries, that moving to a low-carbon economy is an opportunity to promote continued economic growth and sustainable development, that the need for and deployment of transformational clean energy technologies at lowest possible cost are urgent, and that the response must involve balanced attention to mitigation and adaptation.

We reaffirm the objective, provisions and principles of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Recalling the Major Economies Declaration adopted in Toyako, Japan, in July 2008, and taking full account of decisions taken in Bali, Indonesia, in December 2007, we resolve to spare no effort to reach agreement in Copenhagen, with each other and with the other Parties, to further implementation of the Convention.

Our vision for future cooperation on climate change, consistent with equity and our common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, includes the following:

1. Consistent with the Convention’s objective and science: Our countries will undertake transparent nationally appropriate mitigation actions, subject to applicable measurement, reporting, and verification, and prepare low-carbon growth plans.

Developed countries among us will take the lead by promptly undertaking robust aggregate and individual reductions in the midterm consistent with our respective ambitious long-term objectives and will work together before Copenhagen to achieve a strong result in this regard.

Developing countries among us will promptly undertake actions whose projected effects on emissions represent a meaningful deviation from business as usual in the mid-term, in the context of sustainable development, supported by financing, technology, and capacity-building.

The peaking of global and national emissions should take place as soon as possible, recognising that the timeframe for peaking will be longer in developing countries, bearing in mind that social and economic development and poverty eradication are the first and overriding priorities in developing countries and that low-carbon development is indispensible to sustainable development.

We recognise the scientific view that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels ought not to exceed 2C.

In this regard and in the context of the ultimate objective of the Convention and the Bali Action Plan, we will work between now and Copenhagen, with each other and under the Convention, to identify a global goal for substantially reducing global emissions by 2050.

Progress toward the global goal would be regularly reviewed, noting the importance of frequent, comprehensive, and accurate inventories.

We will take steps nationally and internationally, including under the Convention, to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and to enhance removals of greenhouse gas emissions by forests, including providing enhanced support to developing countries for such purposes.

2. Adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change is essential.

Such effects are already taking place.

Further, while increased mitigation efforts will reduce climate impacts, even the most aggressive mitigation efforts will not eliminate the need for substantial adaptation, particularly in developing countries which will be disproportionately affected.

There is a particular and immediate need to assist the poorest and most vulnerable to adapt to such effects.

Not only are they most affected but they have contributed the least to the build up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Further support will need to be mobilised, should be based on need, and will include resources additional to existing financial assistance.

We will work together to develop, disseminate, and transfer, as appropriate, technologies that advance adaptation efforts.

3. We are establishing a Global Partnership to drive transformational low-carbon, climate-friendly technologies.

We will dramatically increase and coordinate public sector investments in research, development, and demonstration of these technologies, with a view to doubling such investments by 2015, while recognising the importance of private investment, public-private partnerships and international cooperation, including regional innovation centres.

Drawing on global best practice policies, we undertake to remove barriers, establish incentives, enhance capacity-building, and implement appropriate measures to aggressively accelerate deployment and transfer of key existing and new low-carbon technologies, in accordance with national circumstances.

We welcome the leadership of individual countries to spearhead efforts among interested countries to advance actions on technologies such as energy efficiency; solar energy; smart grids; carbon capture, use, and storage; advanced vehicles; high-efficiency and lower-emissions coal technologies; bio-energy; and other clean technologies.

Lead countries will report by November 15, 2009, on action plans and roadmaps, and make recommendations for further progress.

We will consider ideas for appropriate approaches and arrangements to promote technology development, deployment, and transfer.

4. Financial resources for mitigation and adaptation will need to be scaled up urgently and substantially and should involve mobilising resources to support developing countries.

Financing to address climate change will derive from multiple sources, including both public and private funds and carbon markets.

Additional investment in developing countries should be mobilised, including by creating incentives for and removing barriers to funding flows.

Greater predictability of international support should be promoted. Financing of supported actions should be measurable, reportable, and verifiable.

The expertise of existing institutions should be drawn upon, and such institutions should work in an inclusive way and should be made more responsive to developing country needs.

Climate financing should complement efforts to promote development in accordance with national priorities and may include both program-based and project-based approaches.

The governance of mechanisms disbursing funds should be transparent, fair, effective, efficient, and reflect balanced representation.

Accountability in the use of resources should be ensured. An arrangement to match diverse funding needs and resources should be created, and utilise where appropriate, public and private expertise.

We agreed to further consider proposals for the establishment of international funding arrangements, including the proposal by Mexico for a Green Fund.

5. Our countries will continue to work together constructively to strengthen the world’s ability to combat climate change, including through the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate.

In particular, our countries will continue meeting throughout the balance of this year in order to facilitate agreement in Copenhagen."¹

The question now is, who sits oversight on this grandiose approach? Because at this point in distress, we are and should be, calling for some form of accountability beyond pie in the sky possibilities.

At a UN climate change conference in Copenhagen in December. High on the agenda will be The "Bali Roadmap," Presented in December 2007,the roadmap, [ By the "way" it would be interesting to poll roadmap as an Artificial term. ]  set a two-year deadline for a global agreement and pledged to complete a new UN climate treaty at the Copenhagen meeting due to be accepted to follow up on the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012.

We need to do more than pull rabbits out of hats here.

What they propose is founded on the belief that virtually all electricity generation will have to come from renewables, nuclear power or  "clean" coal an option not yet proven cost efficient. Since Europe is closing more than opening nuclear plants, and the fact that low grade nuclear feul or remaining world resources, produce carbon air pollution. It doesn’t sound like much of a plan. What now follows is a quote from Debunking Nuclear As An Environmental Renewable Hope posted July 26th 2008, and can be found in the archives.

"Nuclear not cost efficient or without grave risk in development is not CO2 free if the whole uranium fuel cycle is taken into consideration. Using current uranium ore grades (~ 2% concentration) results in 32g of CO2 equivalent (CO2eq) per kWh of nuclear electricity (kWhel) in Germany. In France, it is only 8g/kWhel, while it is higher in Russia and in the USA, 65g and 62g respectively. One reason for this is the quality of uranium: the lower the grade, the more CO2. A substantial increase of nuclear electricity generation would require the exploitation also of lower grade uranium ores and thus would increase the CO2-emissions up to 120g CO2eq/kWhel, which is much more than other energy technologies: natural gas co-generation 50-140g CO2eq/kWhel); wind power 24g, hydropower 40g; energy conservation 5g CO2eq/kWhel)."²

The L’Aquila summit is the last G8 summit before the December Copenhagen meeting and what are we hearing.

The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), reports a rise in temperatures of more than 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels would be dangerous for the delicate balance of Earth’s climatic system.

Italy, holder of  the current G8 presidency, wants the summit to agree that global greenhouse gas emissions should peak by 2020 and world temperature change should be limited to 2 Celsius degrees above pre-industrial levels.

It is likely the World Economy will contract this year for the first time since the last World War and see the birth of a G20 economy summit.

There is no proven consensus, strategy, or approach. They meet to consolidate their position in light of current change, and decide how to deal with the heat…

Coming to the table we saw US 2020 Carbon reduction amount projections amounting to no more than 4% compared to 1990, Japan 8% compared to 1990, Canada 20% by 2020 compared to 2006. Europe is willing to go 30% by 2020 if others show an honest effort while Brasil has signed up for the 2 degree cap on temperature China is committed to carbon reduction only slow as not to upset economy. India thinks everyone else is at fault and makes no firm commitment.

 According to the IPCC, all developed countries should cut their greenhouse gas emissions by 25-40 percent by 2020 compared to 1990 levels to tackle climate change.

Some G8 countries want a new sliding scale to redefine developing nations and demand more actions by the wealthier developing countries in slowing global warming. Japan submitted a draft text of a new climate pact to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), bringing up the concept of "wealthier developing countries." Tthe draft document released on May 20,  also passed the buck to poor nations, setting emission reduction goals for developing countries by 2050.

On the table at the moment is an 80% reduction by 2050 that even Canada seems willing to go along with.

Who are we bargaining with, the planet? In the end we may find the bargain impossible to live with.

"Another thorny issue for developed countries is how to channel money and technology to the poor to help deal with climate change, as an estimated 100 billion to 200 billion U.S. dollars will be needed to support developing countries to tackle climate change."³

I hear these totals and they ring with speculation. Why not 1 trillion U.S. or 5 trillion U.S.?

Whatever the cost, it will be miniscule to the life value lost if leveling off and reduction of  carbon based pollution doesn’t take place.

L’Aquila from Wednesday to Friday will see the major economies forum for 17 countries, which account for some 80 percent of the global emissions gather and dialogue on the current positions.

The EU has urged leading economies to split the bill based on their historical emissions and current wealth. The bloc members yet need to settle on how to split the bill among themselves.

Hey! I’m all for a win win situation but when the loosing partner is the one that keeps you safe and protected, I wonder when negative value ever meant success except in a shady deal. Who is paying whom, and what happens to the money afterward. Considering it is a surcharge for pillaging the environment in a polluting way, is the money going into keeping antiquated technology alive or immediate improvement to equipment  with environmental impact or directly to the environment

It’s nice to see the G8 nations getting together in some form of show of solidarity, pulling figures together like 20 billion to help move food supplies to third world countries. Developing, and developed countries also agreeing to regulate to maintain temperatures below dangerous levels or rising more than 2 degrees. Barack Obama’s commitment to lower emissions by 80% between now and 2050 is viewed with criticism among some.

Forward thinking countries have a great opportunity to lead in more than lip service by expanding development of already realized and proven technologies that can make energy for the user, priceless, in the same way air and water is. It is now possible.

The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) puts the inevitability of drastic global warming in the starkest terms yet, stating that major impacts on parts of the world – in particular Africa, Asian river deltas, low-lying islands and the Arctic are unavoidable and the focus must be on adapting life to survive the most devastating of the changes.

"The IPCC assessment states that up to two billion people worldwide will face water shortages and up to 30 per cent of plant and animal species would be put at risk of extinction if the average rise in temperature stabilises at 1.5C to 2.5C."

Canada and Russia are considered the bad boys among G8 nations.

Canada is furthest from its reduction target for the greenhouse gas under a global treaty and has made little progress compared with other Group of Eight members, according to the report commissioned by German insurer Allianz SE.

I find Canada stands true to form when you consider a Canadian wrote The Bill of Human Rights, and Canada was last to ratify.

Subscribe through Google Feedburner at the top to be kept informed.

What follows is a lesson from industry to industry. Lev Tahor – A Pure Heart…

A Pure Heart

Important History and The Energy Door We "Now" Stand At

The Earth! Home you say? Always evolving! An ever advancing or retreating life value, formed of it’s environment and ongoing conditioning. That sounds alive!

The ancients  taught a metaphor for fostering value that was found in how much our inseparable mind and body is a reflection of our environment; and our environment determines our happiness.

When we have food for our body, and a guaranteed safe place to rest our head, the world can be put in order. That’s one of the important things I remember when I exercise my freedom to vote at election time.

What I can’t understand in our ecological climate is leadership controlling large nations in the world declaring oil production will fuel economics for the next one hundred years, when we should be shutting down gas stations globally in order to protect the fragile ecosystem.

It’s time to take the rose coloured glasses off!

Twenty percent of the worlds privileged currently use Eighty percent of the worlds mineral wealth. Continuing our current path we will nearly exhaust all the Earths mineral wealth by the end of this century. So I ask you, what self aggrandizing, vain glorious drive, necessitates many kinds of cars, televisions, other industry manufactured good, or good entertainment?

Yet, where energy is concerned diversity of solutions is what is needed. We have to break out of standardization, some say conservative view point. However you look at it, I caution with a reminder many can relate too. Some are to close to the problems to see them or turn a blind eye because their livlihood depends on it.

When your dependence for a place to rest your head, and food, finds you somehow linked to a source of a problem, how do you in good conscience resolve to continue.

They say our economy is out of free fall. Yet, along with the rose coloured talk of recovery I hear, foaming the runways continues.

There will always be need for oil and electricity. Although oil will no longer enjoy the prominence it once held.  Energy production replaced when possible by Eco friendly substitutes; the appearance of vehicles that no longer run on combustion engines, and the working patented over unity electric devices now entering the market; promise the stimulus of a new economic evolution. An Evolution with all the needs of previous evolutions, creating a new service areas, and new jobs. Energy availability no longer needs connection to a grid or even a price tag beyond the price of the over unity generator (now being distributed from Hong Kong) and installation.

I look to history for advice. Looking at the vicissitudes engendered by (click to read ) "The Bubble of 1720", and reviewing the birth, history, and destabilization, credit proliferation has caused over the last 300 years to world economic and social growth. I see there has been no remarkable ethical growth in the use of world natural resources by commerce since 1720. The old model continues to break down and get new crutches at our expense. It’s time to stop putting one over on the other guy and build community. Perhaps doing away with credit would be a good start.

Since the days of the Babylonian traders , humans have profited from scarcity and want. A life condition from which true happiness and abundance can never grow.  That has been our programming for millennia , and when we were not as plentiful, it served well.  It can not continue or we will destroy our planetary habitation security by exhausting our precious resources. After three hundred years of resorting to "Sinking Funds" that make debt slaves of us all, we demonstrate no better accountability than our distant ancestors.

Outmoded behavior needs to end. Politicians behaving like spoiled children with demonstrations of posturing and saber rattling has to end, and community building has to take on a level of  importance unparalleled to anything it ever has in the whole history of man. A good start in the government arena at this time is asking why our hard come by earnings are being used to prop up infrastructure that is not totally committed to serving the best interests of the planet and the people by getting them off services they need not pay for, and helping the environment in the process.

Trillions of dollars of our wealth is gone forever. If someone where to ask do we bleed I’d have to say; yes we do. The engine is broken! If it was ever created to be a benefit to the whole it was created faulty and needs a redesign. Perhaps on a totally different model not seen, taking into account lessons learned from past failures. . Approaching the recovery in a conservative standardized way may repair the old engine but that’s not enough anymore. It only makes us a slave to an antiquated unworkable and crippling model.

We don’t pay for air or fresh water because it’s plentiful. Other natural resources can make us energy independent. There are discovered and patented means to make home owners energy independent, off grid. Science exists and world patents are on file for vehicles that don’t need to plug in or line up at a fuel pump; and ZPE (zero point energy), and over unity electrical generators . Energy at a cost can become a thing of the past.

Carbon taxes are not a good solution. Anyone who has done their homework in the area understands they have on numerous occasions been manipulated and rendered ineffectual. In some cases making the over all situation worse, defeating their purpose.

Growth can be painful. Sometimes we have to make hard decisions. We could suffer a similar fate to the Rapa Nui of Easter Island who so overused their resources, they decimated their rich culture. Coming to terms now with our overall effect is the most important process man has ever had to face. The intelligent human who understands the consequences must now give serious thought to the causes and remedies within reach.

That means change of linear view through dialogue and realizing we are all part of the question of existence and creation..

The following videos other than Home the movie that follow are a few years old and address the new energy field science as it was then, and the reason for concern…

"We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people."

–Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Free Energy; The Race to Zero Point

Click here to view the embedded video.

If by copyright not available in your country click on the YouTube logo to watch on YouTube

The Home Movie — (the awakening need)

Extracting Zero Point Energy From The Quantum Vacuum

There is enough free energy available today on the planet to never again have to extract the means of creating power with a price tag…

Alternative energy sources pushed by the establishment such as hydrogen, biomass, and even nuclear are highly inefficient, dangerous and exist only to perpetuate the profit structure the industry has created. When we look beyond the propaganda and self serving solutions put forth by the energy companies we find a seemingly endless stream of clean abundant and renewable energy for generating power.

Solar and wind energy are well known to the public but the potential of these mediums remains unexpressed.

Solar energy derived from the sun has such abundance that one hour of light at high noon contains more energy than what the whole world consumes in a year. If we can capture one hundredth of one percent of this energy we would never have to use oil, gas, or anything else. The question is not availability but the technology to harness it. There are many advanced mediums today that accomplish just that if they were not hindered to compete with market share with the established energy power structures.

Then there is wind energy. Wind energy has long been denounced as weak and due to being location driven impractical. This is simply not true, the US Department of Energy admitted in 2007 that if wind was fully harvested in just three of Americas fifty states it could power the entire nation.

Then there are the rather unknown mediums of tidal and wave power.

Tidal power is derived from tidal shifts in the ocean. Installing turbines that capture this movement generates energy. In the United Kingdom forty two sites are currently noted as available forecasting that thirty four percent of all the UK’s energy could come from tidal power alone.

Wave power that extracts energy from the surface motions of the oceans is estimated to have a potential of 80,000 terawatts a year. This means that 50% of the world’s energy needs could be produced by this means alone.

It is important to note solar, wind, tidal, and wave power requires virtually no preliminary energy to harness , unlike coal, oil, gas, biomass, hydrogen, and all the others.

In combination these four mediums alone could power the world forever.

That being said there happens to be another form of clean renewable energy that trumps them all; geothermal.

Geothermal energy utilizes a process known as heat mining by a simple process using water to create energy. In 2006 an MIT report on geothermal energy found that 13,000 ZJ (zettajoules) are currently available in the Earth with the possibility of 2000 ZJ being easily tappable with available technology. The total energy consumption of all the countries on the planet is approximately 0.5 ZJ a year. This means about 4000 years of planetary power could be harnessed in this medium alone.

When we understand that the Earth’s heat generation is constantly renewed. This energy is really limitless and could be used forever. These energy sources are only a few of the available sources and as time goes on we will discover more.

The grand realization is that we have total energy abundance without the need of pollution, energy conservation, or in fact a price tag.

Today’s economies exist only for profit not the good of the people or the planet. It is only the need for profit and the assumed or created scarcity of resources that keep our current flawed economic system from evolving to the next logical conclusion.

Featured on The Larry King Show three times thirty years ago; The-Venus-Project is still alive and even more salient and timely now.

Thirty years ago entrenched values, a strong sense of security, the political fore scope, and a refusal to consider the future costs of current and ongoing practices on future developments, considered what  Jacque Fresco presented as solutions for humanity novel ideas .It is a direction that entails nothing less than the total redesign of culture, that designs out or eliminates the worlds shortcomings we faced and face today.

Some might say impossible, but on close inspection it’s feasible provided you are willing to give up all preconceived notions and conventional thinking.

Many concerned today with the serious problems facing modern society, unemployment, violent crime, replacement of humans by technology, over-population and a decline in the Earth’s ecosystems need to re-examine the values of current systems and the stark reality that they don’t work.

The constant cycle of boom and bust is not natural, it is man made for the creation of scarcity and the accumulation of wealth and the debt incurred from the concomitant cycle will eventually lead to an unrecoverable crash.

Jacque Fresco presents plans that resolves all problems that amount to scarcity of any kind, by introducing a never attempted other than during war time, resource based economy actively engaging in the research development and application of workable solutions. Through abundance the use of innovative approaches to social awareness, educational incentives, and the consistent application of the best that science and technology can offer directly to the social system, Jacque Fresco offers a comprehensive plan for social reclamation in which human beings, technology, and nature will be able to coexist in a long-term, sustainable state of dynamic equilibrium.

The answer to the question does the Earth possess enough resources to create abundance without a price tag and without the need of submission to employment is yes.

From the realization that technology frees us and increases our quality of life we can realize the focus of intelligent management of Earth’s resources is our only logical course to long term prosperity into the milleniums to come.

In a monetary system everything has a financial cost or implied value, including you, your children and their children to come who’s contributions can be borrowed upon by the system. In effect they become debt slaves.

Where building blocks or material resources are concerned they only have value if there is an assumed or created scarcity. If everything was plentiful like air and water there would be no reason to sell anything.

With the advancement of automation, machinery, and technology relieving humans of labour the unfolding social aspects would have no reason for money.

A resource based economy is concerned with the well being of the people and their supporting biosphere.

At present we don’t have to burn fossil fuels or use anything that would contaminate the environment

The following is an interview with Venus Project Team Leaders. Following that is a condensed presentation of the tenets, philosophy, and goals, or the  “Activist Orientation Guide” of the Zeitgeist Movement, also known as the activist wing of “The Venus Project”

An Interview With Venus Project Team Leaders

Activist Orientation Guide of the Zeitgeist Movement