Re: Off Topic (Yanks) "An Inconvenient Truth"

kevinmccabe@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

I was lucky enough to see a
pre-screening of this film last night
in Seattle.

<snip good stuff about raising consciousness on Global Warming>

While all this is well and good, Global Warming is but a symptom of
something wrong in the heartland of America, something that's been wrong
since the rise to power of the beef, oil, timber and rubber barons
together with the banking conglomerates of the late nineteenth and early
twentieth century. Power corrupts it is said, and that kind of massed and
assembled power, in all its variety and deep influences worldwide,
corrupts absolutely.

Lets look at three relatively minor expressions of problems where it
appears no thinking is being done to resolve obviosu problems at federal
and local levels of government.

The power of vested industrial interests in the United States is holding
back the country hugely.

The time taken for recognition of and action to remedy sub-standard
safety design in automobiles alone has resulted in thousands of
preventable deaths.

This is where death is a consequence but cost is relatively minimal.

How much harder so you suppose it will be to push a simple agenda like
producing cleaner, more fuel efficient, cars and especially trucks and
Heavy Goods Vehicles?

Never mind all the carbon trading waffle, this is a simple, good idea.

But you see, so many American companies might see a 1% drop in profits if
you did this, it'll prolly never happen.

Car and truck manufacturers would have to redesign or buy in efficient
engines.

Design schools might have to learn about - shock! horror! -
AERODYNAMICS!!!!!

Coach builders and factories might have to be retooled to produce the new
"slippery" bodies.

Investment in gas, ethanol and electric powered vehicles might have to
occur, and that means changes to the distribution networks, station
forecourts and delivery-to-customer systems.

Now start looking at the heating of buildings and building codes in the
same light.

Up ot a certain point, this is a huge fuel saver. The costs are usually
recoverable after about 10 years and after that you're on a winner
[assuming your house lasts 10 years - see below]

Basically put, you insulate a building enough, the problem becomes heat
loss, not heat gain. But the first thing is to update the building codes
to insulate the building using non poisonous materials. After that you
need to think about passive solar design and cooling, transmittance of
heat, insulation and distribution using air envelopes et cetera,
otherwise you'll use more energy to cool your building than you would to
heat it. In the end, some climates are just expensive to live in, because
of the heat.

That brings us to the huge cost of disaster recovery. Is there some law
that says people HAVE to live in timber houses, or trailer park homes in
either Tornado Alley or the Southern States most affected by Hurricanes?

Or that the environment Hurricanes and Tornados travel through have to be
both target rich and ammunition rich? By that I mean that using ***
materials that blow off in a Hurricane provides high velocity objects
that can kill humans, and that building with flimsy materials and having
no reinforced concrete "safe rooms" or storm cellars in houses leaves
entire families at risk. I know some houses have them, but most don't.

Because this all feeds back into the huge fuel use in the States. Ever
time there's a storm warning in the Southern States, you see on the news
that people have to evacuate. They did it for Katrina and Frances and
some did if for Charlie, although not enough.

How clever is that? How much fuels is wasted sitting in traffic jams
going "out of town"? Some people even ran out of fuel sitting in jams
during the run up to Katrina! I ask you! In addition, American roads are
no different than anywhere else - they are generally not safe places to
be, so putting millions on the move is never clever if another
alternative could be provided.

In that regard, the obvious short to medium term solution is "Limited
evacuation". Each state should have a network of safe and secure
facilities, whether a converted or convertible sports stadium, preferably
on higher ground or with services and accommodation floors high enough to
avoid flooding, with adequate parking for storm refugees and sufficient
storm shielding, to cater for its population.

Let's call them Storm Centers. Why hasn't FEMA already thought of this
investment in the safety of the population it serves?

This would allow Federal Rescue and Aid agencies easier access to the
population they hope to help [they are located together in one place or
several places]. This would facilitate food drops and medical supply
drops as well as airlifts to hospital for the injured and/or sick. If the
situation deteriorated beyond a safe point and a full evacuation became
necessary then it could be organized around the Storm Centers.

Reduced Fuel Costs.
Reduced Disaster Recovery Costs.
Reduced Human Costs.

And at the same time huge investment in education and health to improve
the quality of the person in every ethnic grouping, to make America the
place people thought it was, one where the "huddled masses" have a chance
to succeed and prosper, not the way it currently is, where they end up as
economic slaves with serious drug addictions and short life expectancies.

FWIW

M.
.

Loading