Obama opposes drilling in Alaska because he thinks it's a political ploy. Obama says the benefits of drilling may not be realized for five years or more.

Well, I guess politicians aren't allowed to think that far ahead, are they? Incidentally Clinton made the same argument, and that was more than 10 years ago. If we had started drilling then, we would currently be enjoying the benefits of home-produced oil, prices would be lower, and we would be that much less dependent on Middle Eastern oil.

Oil is now the fuel that drives the engine of Islamic radicalism. Remove the revenues of oil and the Muslim world would join sub-Saharan Africa as the least important part of the planet. Of course if America stops buying from them the Muslims would still sell to other countries. But who can deny that new sources of supply would reduce the global price of oil? And this would naturally reduce the surplus that is available to fund Islamic terrorism.

Currently about 40 percent of America's oil comes from domestic production, and the rest is imported. Approximately 20 percent of our oil imports are from Canada, and another 20 percent come from Mexico and South America. Africa--mainly Nigeria--accounts for another 20 percent. Remarkably, only about 15 percent of America's oil imports are from the Middle East.

What this means is that eliminating American reliance on the Muslim countries is an entirely reasonable objective. The problem is that America's oil needs are increasing, and domestic production is not keeping up. So we are becoming more dependent on imports.

McCain intends to reverse this. He's not insensitive to environmental concerns, and so rather than drill in the Alaskan wildlife reserve he intends only to drill offshore. Even so, he is being opposed by the Obama Democrats and some fanatical environmentalists. These naysayers are trying to convincing America that more oil from Alaska means no more glaciers and caribou.

This is a wild exaggeration and a false choice. And if Americans are forced to choose between lower gas prices and a few more caribou, is there any doubt how the vote would go? I think I am in the majority in saying that I don't mind caribou, but I really like my car. Caribou are nice to see but we need gas to drive out and see them.

Let's by all means drill off the coast of Alaska. At the same time, let's drill some sense into the liberal Democrats.

Postscript: More than one regular responder to this blog has commented that my percentage numbers add up to more than 100 percent, demonstrating my poor math skills. Re-read the post. It says that two-fifths of our oil comes from domestic production and the remaining three-fifths from imports. Then considering only the imports, I give the breakdown of what percentage comes from each foreign region. So there is no math error--or rather, the error is on the part of the posters, who would do well to read more carefully or enroll in basic math.

It's that time of year again: cue the obligatory anti-fireworks article in every local newspaper. Some are totally justified. Governor Schwarzenegger is right to tell Californians not to use consumer fireworks this year because of how dry it is out there and how many fires they've had to fight already this year.

And the National Council on Fireworks Safety is right to offer helpful hints about how to shoot off fireworks safely. (We enjoyed their video starring a suburban Philip Seymour Hoffman lookalike.)

But all the articles nit-picking about, say, the environmental impact of bottle rockets, such as this advice column on Salon.com, seem like buzz-killing at its most extreme. The latter's suggestion:

Gasoline prices continue to rise, pinching American consumers. It's becoming a major political issue, and could soon become an economic crisis. What is the Bush/McCain solution? Offshore oil drilling in the United States. Even if you think this makes sense, it's the latest example of implementing a policy for the wrong reasons.

I've watched a lot of nature documentaries, never have I seen a shark this big. Kudos to the Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory. The more ocean we discover the more Deep Sea Attenborough documentaries we get.

Hawaii oceanography professors captured an 18-foot six-gill shark on video during a 2006 research submersible dive off Molokai. The video was posted recently on YouTube and has received more than a 1,000 hits.

"Oh my God! It's huge!" said UH oceanography professor Jeff Drazen on the YouTube video. The video of the deep-sea shark, named Hexanchus griseus, estimated at 18 feet in length, was taken in August 2006 from Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory's Pisces V submersible, anchored on the sea floor at a depth of more than 3,000 feet about two miles off Molokai...Read More...Honolulu Star Bulletin

via videosift.com

There has always been extreme debate over oil and gas drilling in Alaska. While some are convinced the drilling is making no negative effect on the environment and its inhabitants, others exist on the complete opposite side of the spectrum. The debate is understandable, and one must look at the facts.

The federal government is expected to begin sales of drilling leases in Alaska's Chukchi Sea. But it's not a big deal because they are only selling 30 MILLION ACRES of Alaskan sea in the name of oil. More importantly, most of this area is critical to the survival of polar bears.

However, environmentalists and Alaskan Natives cannot decide on whether or not to list polar bears under the endangered species act (ESA). The reason for this is because a conservative law-firm known as the Pacific Legal Foundation is ready to pounce and attack, "any arbitrary, unjustified ESA listing." A bitter court battle could possibly ensue.

Studies show that in recent decades the polar bear population has increased dramatically. There are estimates that as few as 5,000 polar bears existed in the 1950s. But keep in mind, that was a time when hunting polar bears was legal and acceptable. Now that polar bear hunting is regulated, as many as 25,000 polar bears exist. Unfortunately, we are still 60 percent below historic levels of polar bears.

U.S Geological Survey scientists say drilling 30 million acres of Alaskan sea will result in the loss of about two thirds of the world's polar bear population by 2050. In a letter to congress last week, a group of more than 600 scientists said, "Global warming is already causing serious damage to wildlife and ecosystems, and reliable projections call for significant additional damage and disruptions."

Legislative director for the Alaska Wilderness League, Kristin Miller, says the Mineral's Management Service has admitted there will be a substantial likelihood of oil spills in the Chukchi Sea. She adds that, "There is no proven method to clean up an oil spill in the Arctic's broken sea ice, or even to reliably clean up a spill in open water."

I'm not exactly sure how anyone could think that drilling is not harmful to the environment. We obviously have to encounter the death of thousands of polar bears by the mid-century to be convinced. But even then, I doubt the federal government will care much. Coca-Cola better come up with another animal to feature in their winter ads!

Watch The Young Turks

Just more examples to add to the millions already out there.
Most have heard that rising sea temperature has been killing our Coral reefs - Read Coral Bleaching. But I personally had no idea of the rate that Coral reefs were dying. Last night on CBC, my pet fish and I watched this report in horror. 50% of Caribbean Coral Reefs have been wiped out in the past 12 months.

It might have been better to title this post something like: "reefs dying" or "Global Warming killing reefs" - I was actually going to title it "Are Humans retarded?"

Horrifying! Climate Change related news happens everyday, we are seeing the impact of dirty energy now. We have the knowledge and technology to clean up the planet, but nobody is willing to lead. This Coral Reef story on CBC ironically came after a report about the announcement of Alberta's "Green Plan" which includes no plan to reduce emissions until 2020. Yeehaw. Yes, we are a stupid bunch eh. Let's not forget North America's poor showing in Bali.

Now I understand there are still many people in both America and Canada who actually believe the Exxon propaganda - "burning our natural resources doesn't harm the earth." I think this thinking is our biggest hurdle. You actually might think that the Coral Reef destruction has nothing to do with humans, well I planned ahead and now I have a second story that you can't disagree with. The Destruction of the Rain Forest.

Check out the destruction map on BBC.

When I was in elementary school, we were taught about the "Save the Rainforest" campaigns. Ironically we also had "McDonalds Hamburger day" every month.

Here is a call to action video about Global Warming with the Rainforest as the main theme.

======
- Hoard's Mind Blowing Propeller Submissions

Interesting little video from the PBS series E2 Design. China who is currently building at the pace equivalent of two New York Cities - every year - for 20 years, is in dire need of Green solutions. You can see the have started to think ahead by imposing simple ideas like banning plastic bags.

The pollution is so bad and Cities like Beijing they are actually going to shut down all the factories while the Olympics are taking place to clear up the air.

via videosift.com

Swedish scientists have concluded a study to find out why the Arctic is melting so fast. Watch this CBC video for more information and visit Nature.com to read the study.

My pet blenny, Mr Splashy Pants is his name, has asked me to do a post about the oceans after we watched some Attenborough together, he warns me of an incredible problem that should probably be resolved instead of ignored.

This NBC clip is about the Pacific Plastic Vortex, ocean currents have channel most of our oceans garbage into this area that about the size of Texas. NBC for some reason signs off this clip by warning us that it might already be too late to do anything about this. So what do we do? How do we solve this problem?

More about the Trash Vortex from Greenpeace.

Who says recycling isn't worth it?

Nine Dragons Paper
Woman tops China's new rich list - BBC
Wikipedia

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, one of the highest profile environmental issues was the need to protect the Spotted Owl in Pacific Northwest forests - "owls vs. jobs" as the simpleton news media characterized the debate. Environmentalists rallied to defend the species in the face of destruction of old growth forests, while the logging industry and brainwashed Republicans claimed that jobs for people were more important than a few owls. If I had had a platform at the time, I would have screamed at the top of my lungs, "It's not about the owls!"

Environmental protection is a supremely important issue to me. At the same time, I prefer my environmental movement to be based on sound reason and judgment. In the case of the the Spotted Owl controversy, clearly for me the issue was about protecting old growth forests. In the grand scheme of things, I didn't really care that much about one particular owl subspecies. The overall value of protecting the old growth forest was far more important, and the Spotted Owl was merely an indicator of the forest health, and protection under the Endangered Species Act should have been little more than a legal tactic to reduce or prevent logging in these forests. If the issue were just the Spotted Owls, the logging industry shills and ignorant Republican supporters would have been right.

Why do I insist so much on focusing on the real issue rather than a tangential issue?

Steven Rinella, author of The Scavenger's Guide to Haute Cuisine, had a compelling op-ed in the New York Times on Friday called "Locavore, Get Your Gun."

He argues that advocates for the new "localism" food trend toward shopping for organic, locally grown produce are, essentially, making the case for hunting:

So-called locavores encourage a diet coming from one's own "foodshed" - usually within 100 or 300 miles of home. The rationale of localism is promoted in popular books and Web sites: it leads to a healthier lifestyle and diet; brings money to rural communities; promotes eating meat from animals that are able to "carry out their natural behaviors" and "eat a natural diet"; allows consumers to visit the places where their food is raised; supports the production of foods that have fewer chemical fertilizers and pesticides; and it keeps us in touch with the seasons.

He points out how ironic it is that these are all the same reasons why many Americans choose to hunt, and yet the "localism" movement isn't making a case for hunter's rights. Rinella suggests hunters and locavores come together for a common cause. He writes:

But what are we doing to ourselves today?

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon opened the Bali Climate Change Conference this week with a dire warning about global warming:

"The science is clear. Climate change is happening. The impact is real. The time to act is now. ...unless we act, there will be serious consequences: rising sea levels; more frequent and less predictable floods and severe droughts; famine around the world, particularly in Africa and Central Asia; and the loss of up to a third of our plant and animal species."

So I posted the 10th Anniversary of Kyoto post and I can see still Americans don't believe in Climate change, fair enough, and I understand Canada is no better with the whole "global climate crisis," which is ashame because a country as beautiful as Canada has a lot to lose, and Canadians will be the first to be mauled by migrating polar bears. Just when I had lost all hope, Bob posted this story.

John McCain was asked whether he believed that global warming was an issue. His answer was yes,and went on to say that if we develop green technologies and global warming was not happening,that our children would benefit from a less polluted environment.

I found this interesting because for some reason I was under the impression all Republicans didn't believe in climate change. The amazing thing about the statement above is exactly what I believe, don't listen to scientists or fox news, just look outside, look at the lakes, the rivers, the smokestacks. If our western society can create solutions for the lobalgay armingway then everybody around the world will benefit, we gotta understand we created this mess and it's up to us to clean it up. I wanted to find a clip of John saying that and post it here, I want to know the date of that quote, otherwise there are tonnes of environmental McCain clips on the youtube. Like this one below from the Des Moines Register.

Associated Press - Dec 11th

The Kyoto global warming pact - which marked its 10th anniversary Tuesday - was brokered under vastly different circumstances from those facing negotiators this week as they map out an agenda for a successor agreement.
.........
The Kyoto pact requires 36 industrialized nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5 percent below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012. Australia announced last week it would join, leaving the United States as the only major developed economy to have rejected it...Read More..

To inspire your commentary here is a video of Bangkok sinking, it's from Al-Jazeera English. I know some of the commentators don't like Al-Jazeera (shocking), so here is a raw video of the sinking streets of Bangkok, here is also some related literature from American sources... Time.com, usatoday.com.