|
7749. alistairConnor - 8/26/2009 10:10:40 PM Yes there is. I testify that it works.
The funniest part is, in my case it's absolutely legit. I own the licence, I didn't have the media.
It would have been smarter to do it while the old disk was still reliable of course. 7750. iiibbb - 8/27/2009 1:01:20 PM New news on bees and colony collapse
High fructose corn syrup.
My only question is that I thought Europe wasn't having as big of a problem with CCD... do they not feed their bees with HFCS? 7751. alistairconnor - 8/27/2009 5:02:42 PM HFCS is a very American thing. In Europe, domestically produced sugar is mainly from beets.
I have heard of beekeepers putting out buckets of sugared water to get hives through tough times, but not as a routine thing. 7752. robertjayb - 9/14/2009 7:51:40 PM Solar-powered cooling?
Warning: Breakthrough hinted. Be wary.
Someday, you might unplug your air conditioner and cool your house on a 110- degree afternoon by cranking up the heat from the sun.
In his laboratory at the University of California at Merced, physicist Roland Winston says he is nearing a breakthrough that could make that scenario happen in the next several years.
7753. alistairconnor - 10/27/2009 6:27:41 PM Write to your senators. Now.
When Barack Obama was elected president, he was heralded as a possible savior for climate- treaty talks that had dragged on for years while George W. Bush rejected limits on U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions.
“America is back” at the United Nations negotiating table, Democratic Senator John Kerry declared after the November election. Danish climate minister Connie Hedegaard said U.S. emissions policy moved forward 35 years overnight.
Instead, Obama may send empty-handed envoys in December to the table in Copenhagen where 192 countries will try to assign emissions reductions because Congress has given him no mandate. With the European Union, Japan and Australia ready to pledge cuts of more than 20 percent only if other nations follow suit, the stage is set for promises to collapse.
“How can we expect other major players to move their position until they know that in the end the U.S. is also going to deliver?” Hedegaard, chairwoman of the UN talks running from Dec. 7-18, said in an interview.
When Obama picks up his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo in December, he’ll be an hour’s flight from where more than 10,000 envoys, UN officials and lobbyists will be meeting to conclude an agreement on slowing climate change, a challenge the president has said the U.S. will “lead the world” in tackling.
Obama hasn’t decided whether to make an appearance, administration officials said. Environmentalists say he’s a likely no-show because stalled climate bills in Congress mean the U.S. may have little to offer, threatening to unravel prospects for a global deal. 7754. wabbit - 10/28/2009 12:36:49 AM I have a question. What is stopping the EU, Japan and Australia from going ahead without the US? Are we financing it for everyone? Or are the EU, Japan and Australia looking for a fall guy so they don't have to move forward on their own?
Ok, that's three questions, but two are follow-ups. 7755. alistairConnor - 10/29/2009 1:20:01 AM The USA is only the second-biggest producer of greenhouse gases these days. Nevertheless it is still the world's biggest economy.
Everyone is eager to drag their feet, if others drag their feet. Concerned and his clan have always maintained that there is no point in the USA making unilateral concessions, because the Chinese will never make any. Well, guess what. The Chinese, the Indians, the Brazilians are now talking serious GHG reductions. There is a serious chance of serious progress, but it can still all turn to shit.
All of this could at least have been seriously started ten years ago, had the USA taken the lead, instead of actively sabotaging the process. Europe, in particular, has not waited, but has implemented GHG reductions. Now, the USA, or at least Obama, has started talking the talk. The US legislation, at least Waxman's original version, is a major improvement on the European model. But if it isn't passed, then Obama will probably not even go to Copenhagen, and US representatives will mouth platitudes and make no commitments. Remember, the US signed the Kyoto protocol and never ratified it. They won't do that again. They are hamstrung by Congress.
And, no exageration, the future of the world hangs on the actions of a Congress for whom the most ridiculous pork-barrel local measure will always be far more important than anything concerning the rest of the world.
There is a genuine longing for a resumption of positive American leadership in world affairs, after the recent ugly hiatus. If the US chooses to shirk this responsibility, well, the shit hits the fan. 7756. alistairConnor - 10/29/2009 1:32:26 AM Sorry, that was a bit of a rant. I'm always horrified how even the best-intentioned Americans can be so incredibly insular. The whole world is buzzing with the Copenhagen business, and it just doesn't seem to register.
Perhaps it's the Bush backlash I have feared : functional isolationism. It won't wash. The US has global responsibilities. 7757. wabbit - 10/30/2009 1:11:02 AM I don't know that I'm insular so much as sick and tired of the US being blamed for the failure of every piece of paper that comes through the UN. For a bunch of folks who whine about how the US bullies others, I don't see anyone stepping up to the plate to take over. Everyone loves it when the US leadership does things their way, but let us cross a line, ANY line, and everything that is wrong is our fault. So long as the US is responsible, everyone else is able to take credit when things go well while remaining free from accepting the responsibility when it all falls apart.
Hey, here's a thought. Let's move the UN out of NYC and into Paris, or Tel Aviv, or Hamburg, or Beijing. Let someone else take a turn at being the host country. Have fun with that little bit of financial and legal responsibility.
As for global responsibilities, don't others also share those? Why is it that when the US declines, others seem relieved and jump to follow suit and then blame the lack of US leadership. Talk about something that won't wash.
That said, don't get me started on eight years of Bushism.
Maybe all of that rant belongs in the International thread.
I'm not saying we shouldn't get with the program here. We've lost years, decades, that should have been forcing the hand of big oil and auto manufacturers. There is a whole lot we should be doing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Hell, Jimmy Carter was on track back in the 1970's to do exactly that. I'd love to see us tell OPEC to piss off, stop burning coal, to have electric cars (again - why they were all recalled and crushed is a whole 'nuther story), etc. But as for the rest of the world waiting for us to "lead"? YOU lead. 7758. alistairconnor - 10/30/2009 4:25:26 PM Sorry, there is no "you".
Europe does not have its shit together. We're trying to cobble something laboriously together so that the former Soviet bloc EU members get carbon credit for having closed down their dirty old industries when their economies collapsed in the 80s/90s. The EU, meaning the richer Euro countries, are willing to pay to help the poor and emerging nations to reduce their GHG production, but our house has to be in order too.
In order to get significant international agreements, you need critical mass, and you need leadership. The US has critical mass all on its own. Europe ought to have that capability, but won't for at least another couple of decades. The Bush era has shown that NO multilateral agreements can be negotiated as long as the US is not on board. Hence, the collapse of the Doha round of the WTO, and the complete absence of progress on Kyoto. This is what Bush wanted - he was against the principle of multilateralism, and he succeeded in fucking it up, not merely for the US, but for everyone. If Americans now consider that the US now has no leadership role, and does not even have to come to the table to negotiate in good faith, then perhaps that's W's final victory, and legacy. I'll bet it makes him chuckle now.
OK, none of you voted for Bush. That's not the point. The US can't just say sorry guys and walk out of Iraq and Afghanistan. It's the same with climate negotiations. Having prevented any progress in the past eight years, the US has a moral responsibility to repair some of that damage. China, India, Brazil, Europe are all coming to the table with specific propositions. It looks like the US is coming to the table empty-handed, since Congress hasn't got its shit together to pass enabling legislation. That's a historic opportunity missed. 7759. wabbit - 10/30/2009 7:43:54 PM I still don't see how the US *prevented* anyone else from doing what they could about climate change. Brazil managed to start doing something about its horrendous air pollution problem some time ago. Still, I suppose it's useful that the US is there to take the blame, but I'm not going to beat a dead horse.
I don't think we'll be abandoning Afghanistan, but the shrub sure screwed the pooch there.
We also need to get our house in order, the EU doesn't have a monopoly on that problem. We have the potential for leadership, but you aren't hearing the hew and cry daily about how Obama should go back to Kenya where he was born. A lot of people are doing what they can to ensure the failure of this administration - the same group that torpedoed any progress on GHG. Never underestimate the willingness of people to be gullible to avoid thinking for themselves.
Don't count on the US's critical mass, or financial backing. We've got our own problems, too. 7760. alistairconnor - 11/3/2009 11:36:52 PM Merkel prods U.S. on global warming
The part I like is in the second half of the article, about the quibbling and squabbling of the Senate committee. These people are working for you. 7761. alistairconnor - 11/9/2009 4:44:23 PM And they're working hard :
U.S. Senate panel approves Democratic climate bill
But fear not : the planet is in no danger of being saved, just yet.
"This bill will send energy costs racing upward and put the brakes on any hope of economic recovery," said Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, a Republican. "Once the American public starts paying for these special interests, Democrats may not have much to hope for in future elections either." 7762. alistairconnor - 11/23/2009 7:47:09 PM So, Microsoft and Murdoch (mmm, M&Ms!) want to take us back to the days of walled-off internet? The good old days of AOL, or, even better, Compuserve? 7763. alistairconnor - 11/23/2009 7:48:19 PM Murdoch wants to yank his papers off Yahoo. Microsoft is prepared to pay for the privilege of indexing them.
I wouldn't read the Sun, or the WSJ, if you paid me. 7764. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 11/23/2009 11:28:08 PM Murdoch is insane and the biggest media danger on this planet. He's fueling all of the current crop of demagogues while looking for a potential stealth-fascist who can control the ever increasing ignorant and angry mob. Stormy and worrisome times. 7765. arkymalarky - 11/25/2009 6:07:08 PM I hope it kills his media empire off. Now that his bullshit won't be free, maybe people will read less of it. The mob's anger anbd ignorance are increasing, but its numbers are shrinking fast--which is part of why they've turned up the volume. Good thing, since Dems don't seem able to find their butts with both hands right now. When the DNC calls asking for money I give them all I can afford or care to donate: advice. I've been generous with that lately. 7766. TheWizardOfWhimsy - 12/1/2009 8:21:36 AM If you stare at this long enough the yellow dots will disappear.
 7767. alistairConnor - 12/5/2009 2:14:46 PM Hope for the planet? Obama seems to think so
He's switched his visit to Copenhagen from the 9th, at the beginning of the conference, to the end, when at least 100 heads of state will be present.
That's a sure sign that he thinks his presence can make an impact, and that a meaningful accord will emerge.
They won't nail down the details of a binding treaty, but if they kick-start a funding mechanism for clean development for the third world, that will be enough in the meantime. 7768. arkymalarky - 1/14/2010 2:15:47 AM Anyone know why I can't get a dos game to run on my computer? Did some XP update block that or something?
|
