 | "There's Justice In The Universe" |
| Posted 7/2/2008 12:23 PM CDT As I see it, old “King Coal” is back & is wearing a robe labeled “liquefied coal” (synfuel). It can be burned without high levels of sulfur, mercury and other pollutants. However, there are many drawbacks, such as is that it releases extra amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere & one ton of coal only produces two barrels of fuel. Indeed, since it’s an expedient route to avoid long term investments in wind, solar, geothermal, water type renewable resources, it’ll dramatically increase overall CO2 emissions. Seemingly useful as a fuel to generate electricity, it sounds ‘almost tempting’. But when you look at who’s most strongly backing it and see the “big buck” international proponents for nuclear energy getting behind it (ostensibly to use heat from nuclear power plants to help ‘liquefy’ the coal) & you read their literature which derides the idea of humans being a significant cause of global warming and that also ridicules the dangers of radioactive pollution and long-term problems of dealing with nuclear waste AND proliferation, you realize that any possible merits of liquid coal are canceled out. One cannot help but notice that those who most want to bankroll liquid coal do NOT want us to invest in wind, geothermal, or solar power technology. They want to maintain the kind of short term, autocratic profit control that they’re used to in fattening their coffers. [IF we’re going to use coal, then ‘coal gasification’ (not coal liquefication) i s the ONLY sane way.] http://ga3.org/campaign/liquid_coal?rk=7peCutY14gtnE http://www.eia.doe.gov/ http://www.saveourenvironment.org/Liquid-Coal.pdf http://www.futurecoalfuels.org/technology.asp http://www.dsireusa.org/index.cfm?EE=0&RE=1 http://www.liquidcoal.com/ http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/48722490_energy_new_bill_gets_biofuels_right http://www.sierraclub.org/coal/liquidcoal/ |
| Posted 7/1/2008 1:35 PM CDT Oil has long been heavily subsidized. Now, just as we realize the need for expanded renewable energy sources, the oil / nuclear / liquid coal consortium's advocates are blatantly blocking the continuation of tax credits for renewable energy (along with plans to extend research and development credits). The credits for wind, solar and other renewables are being held hostage in Washington & Congress is actively working to thwart federal action regarding a new energy future for America. States are moving to counter Congressional politics that bog us down in our move away from fossil fuels, but that doesn't prevent fossil fuel interests from holding sway in Washington. One way to help Texas move in the direction of energy independence is to realize the following: "Texas is the national leader in wind power and we have the potential to meet the rest of our energy needs with solar power. In fact, if we put solar panels on an area thirty miles by thirty miles in west Texas, we could generate enough electricity to power the entire state at competitive prices (and this is not even taking in consideration the advancing improvement in solar technology / which fossil fuel interests are trying to thwart). But to bring all that clean wind and solar power from west Texas, we need to invest in our transmission grid. Right now, the Public Utilities Commission is deciding how much renewable energy transmission to build. The most ambitious plan they're looking at would create transmission capacity for almost an additional 18,000 megawatts of wind and solar power." I invite you to sign this PUC petition urging the Commissioners to select a plan that maximizes the renewable energy transmission grid. Petiton: http://environmenttexas.org/action/clean-energy/transmission?id4=ES |
| Posted 6/30/2008 1:23 PM CDT Many religions believe that souls are created by God. They, also, usually believe that God created the Universe. He did – just not in the direct ‘hands-on’ sort of way that us mortals can easily conceive of. The creation of the soul and God’s Universe weren’t done in a measurable length of time / and they are interconnected. Early Christians understood this; but, their teachings were not understood by much of the general populace. For example, Christ did not promise instant redemption. Later, these early Christians beliefs were considered to undermine the authoritarian structure of ‘established religion’, branded as esoteric, and banned [Early Christian writings & books that were rejected at the First Council of Nicaea]. Higher order thinking skills were driven underground and ordinary people were given something that they could believe in that would more easily give them hope. Fortunately, other religions that were in existence and evolving at the same time, did stay true to the concept of an everlasting soul and one’s own responsibility in tending to it. The Universal Law of Cause and Effect aka Karma tells us that we shall rise or fall in incremental stages according to our own thoughts and feelings and deeds. You can believe in the salvation that Christ brought, but only if you take his message of Love & Wisdom into your “heart & soul” can you be saved “one step at-a-time” through repeated incarnations in this physical world manifestation of purgatory that some call a “world school”. |
| Posted 6/29/2008 2:21 PM CDT "There is a significant political divide in beliefs about the origin of human beings, with 60% of Republicans saying humans were created in their present form by God 10,000 years ago, a belief shared by only 40% of independents and 38% of Democrats. Not surprisingly, the significantly higher percentage of Republicans who select the creationist view reflects in part the strong relationship between religion and views on the origin of humans. Republicans are significantly more likely to attend church weekly than are others, and Americans who attend church weekly are highly likely to select the creationist alternative for the origin of humans. Implications: "Although it is not a front-burner issue (particularly in light of the economy and the price of gasoline) the issue of teaching evolution in schools came up on the campaign trail last year, and could resurface in one way or the other between now and the November election. Presumptive Republican nominee John McCain is facing the challenge of gaining the confidence and enthusiasm of conservative Republicans. Turnout among this group could be an important factor in determining the final vote outcome in a number of key swing states. As seen here, Republicans are in general sympathetic to the creationist explanation of the origin of humans, and if the issue of what is taught in schools relating to evolution and creationism surfaces as a campaign issue, McCain's response could turn out to be quite important." Read more: http://www.gallup.com/poll/108226/Republicans-Democrats-Differ-Creationism.aspx My Comment: What's scary is the fact that so many people think that man was created by God in our present form. Such a lack of abstract thought and such obtuse literalism is disheartening. |
| Posted 6/24/2008 10:25 AM CDT Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome (EHS) is a condition in which people are highly sensitive to electromagnetic fields. In an area such as a wireless hotspot, they experience pain or other symptoms. People with EHS experience a variety of symptoms including headache, fatigue, nausea, burning and itchy skin, and muscle aches. These symptoms are subjective and vary between individuals, which makes the condition difficult to study, and has left experts divided about the validity of such claims. More than 30 studies have been conducted to determine what link the condition has to exposure to electromagnetic fields from sources such as radar dishes, mobile phone signals and, Wi-Fi hotspots. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/06/21/are-you-allergic-to-wireless-internet.aspx?source=nl http://abcnews.go.com/Health/AllergiesNews/story?id=4939565&page=1 http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs296/en/index.html |
| Posted 6/23/2008 3:29 PM CDT The Government Pension Offset (GPO) affects spousal Social Security by reducing benefits by two-thirds of what their TRS pension is; in many cases eliminating the Social Security benefit entirely. The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) never totally reduces Social Security benefits, but does significantly reduce it by using a modified formula to calculate benefits earned by the individual. And the majority of Texas teachers (and other public service employees like police, etc.) never become aware of this until they're applying for their SS benefits. Those few who work in school districts that pay into SS in addition to their state retirement plan will not be hurt if they've done so for ten years -- but all others are going to have stolen what should have been theirs. Support protection for public servants from unfair penalties. To write a letter: http://www.trta.org/go.cfm?go=getpage&id=158&alias=GPOWEP To send e-mail: http://www.nea.org/lac/socsec/index.html |
| Posted 6/22/2008 5:47 PM CDT The CDC has shown that at least one in four teenage girls has a sexually transmitted disease (the rate for boys is probably higher). Meanwhile, funding for comprehensive sex education goes down while funding for abstinence-only programs goes up along with the teen pregnancy rate. As a retired secondary public school teacher, I can tell you that today's kids may be savy about many things -- but their awareness about STDs is sadly deficient. 'Safe sex' to them simply tends to mean 'avoiding pregnancy'. They have no idea of the longterm effects of STDs and how hard (sometimes impossible) it is to cure them (e.g., neonatal herpes). Teachers are not allowed to provide the kind of information they need, but parents and relatives can. Refresh your knowledge & then alk to your kiddos before it's too late. http://www.teenwire.com/infocus/if-archive-infections.php http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/stds-hiv-safer-sex-101.htm http://www.webmd.com/sex/news/20080311/1-in-4-teen-girls-infected-with-an-std |
| Posted 6/21/2008 10:35 PM CDT "There is growing awareness in this country that the full cost of using oil for transportation is "subsidized" -- that is, gasoline prices paid by consumers do not reflect the full economic cost to society. The true cost is hidden by myriad direct and indirect public subsidies, which include * reduced corporate income taxes for the oil industry * lower than average sales taxes on gasoline * government funding of programs that primarily benefit the oil industry and motorists * "hidden" environmental costs caused by motor vehicles, namely air, water, and noise pollution This hidden system of oil subsidies has created an energy policy by default -- a policy that is actually the reverse of stated national priorities. Oil industry subsidies further our dangerous dependence on foreign oil supplies and burden axpayers with unacceptable costs to human health, the environment, and the economy." Read more: http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/fuel_economy/subsidizing-big-oil.html http://www.heraldextra.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=269357&Itemid=36&mosmsg=Thanks+for+your+vote%21 http://www.lightbulbstoleadership.org/ |
| Posted 6/20/2008 5:47 PM CDT The rapid jump in oil prices is due to rising demand, constrained supplies, the weak dollar and the commodities markets being flooded with money from investors. With the Federal Reserve cutting interest rates so deeply that interest payments on many bonds (the preferred investment of pension funds, etcetera) no longer keep up with inflation, commodities have skyrocketed. As for the spike at the gas pump, one must add on the fact that U.S. refiners cut back on production [they announced such in May]. I'm of the opinion that investments in renewable energy will soon become profitable at this rate. Years ago, I signed on with Austin Energy's GreenChoice (the nation's most successful utility-sponsored green power program). We also bought a hybrid Toyota Highlander. Our roof is aluminum shakes with insulation inerts added. The house is weatherized. http://www.austinenergy.com/Energy%20Efficiency/Programs/Green%20Choice/index.htm |
Posted 6/19/2008 1:15 PM CDT
The Transportation Department is responsible for implementing the new standard requiring automakers to boost the fuel economy of new cars and trucks to an average of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020. Unfortunately, their draft proposal creates a huge loophole by projecting that we will be paying between $2.25 to $2.60 per gallon for gas through 2020. This gas price fantasy allows automakers to cut three to four miles per gallon off of their required fuel economy improvements.
Please let Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters know what your gas prices really are and what you, and the nation, stand to lose if this gas price loophole is not closed.
Take Action:
http://ucsaction.org/campaign/6_11_08_fuel_economy?rk=Q7s8h0FqG%2dgsE
