Saturday, February 01, 2014

The WTO needs to protect emerging economies until they are stable and able to import products without destroying it's domestic economy.

US Secretary of State John Kerry stands with police before boarding his plane at Berlin Tegel Airport for Munich, Germany, Friday, Jan. 31, 2014. Kerry traveled to Germany to attend the Munich Security Conference. (AP Photo/Brendan Smialowski, Pool)(Credit: AP)

MUNICH (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (click here) on Saturday decried what he calls a “disturbing trend” of governments in central and eastern Europe — including in Ukraine — trampling the ambitions of ordinary people.

“The aspirations of citizens are once again being trampled beneath corrupt, oligarchic interests — interests that use money to stifle political opposition and dissent, to buy politicians and media outlets, and to weaken judicial independence and the rights of non-governmental organizations,” he said.
Speaking at an international security conference at which the crisis in Ukraine was a prominent topic, Kerry said, “We see a disturbing trend in too many parts of Central and Eastern Europe, and the Balkans.”

Kerry said the crisis in Ukraine is about ordinary people fighting for the right to associate with the European Union. And he said Ukrainians have decided their futures don’t have to lie with one country — an allusion to Russia.
“Nowhere is the fight for a democratic, European future more important today than in Ukraine. While there are unsavory elements in any chaotic situation, the vast majority of Ukrainians want to live freely in a safe, prosperous country,” Kerry said.

Addressing the conference before Kerry took the stage, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov slammed Western support of Ukraine’s opposition, suggesting it was leading to the escalation of violence....

There is a much bigger picture neither the US or Russia want to address. The Ukraine is being overrun by larger nations with well established economies. The Ukraine wants to develop it's domestic economy so there is stability to the nation and the people. The Ukraine will be a far better trading partner if its domestic economy is vibrant. There is no sense for imports to dominate the country, the people won't have employment to purchase them anyway.

11 July 2013

At the Council for Trade in Goods (click here) meeting on 11 July 2013, concerns were raised over certain trade measures by Ukraine, Russia, Brazil, Japan, Indonesia and Nigeria. The Council noted the recent notification of some 11 regional trade agreements....

...Ukraine said that it imposed the safeguard duty after domestic auto production decreased by 78% and employment in the sector declined by 50%. It said it had fulfilled all the requirements of the Safeguards Agreement, adding that the measure is temporary and aimed at helping domestic producers adjust to global competition. It expressed disappointment that some members have taken counter measures instead of pursuing consultations. 

On another matter, the EU and the United States expressed concern about Ukraine’s import quota on coking coal, noting a recent domestic court ruling against the measure. Australia and the Russian Federation also expressed concerns. Ukraine said that the import licensing measure would end in December, and that in the meantime, it had increased the quota to traditional levels....
This brings up an interesting topic. Most of the conservationists and scientists I know either work out in a gym and/or run to maintain their physical fitness. However, there is merit for the community to begin a new hobby, namely golf. It is becoming a fund raising opportunity for projects important to us.

Posted on 01/31/2014 
Written by Vanessa Finney

Big Bear Lake, CA
January 31, 2014 

This spring, (click here) a pair of snow leopards will relocate to our valley from Washington state’s Woodland Zoo.
 The sisters were born into the Species Survival program there, but a genetic defect left them each blind in one eye and ineligible for the breeding program. The program is in place because the Himalayan natives are endangered. 

It’s not the first time out local zoo will host such exotic creatures: Two males, Ivan and Milo, retired here after participating in Woodland’s breeding program.
The Friends of the Big Bear Alpine Zoo are building a portable “Himalayan Habitat” enclosure to house Shanti and Asha, and to help raise funds for the project, they’re producing what will be an annual golf tournament.

Today is the deadline to register for “Golf for the Snow Leopards,” scheduled for next Friday, February 7 at the renowned Classic Club in Palm Desert....

Why are the numbers wrong.

This is a picture of the Canadian Tar Sands. The land is completely and severely disturbed with the process of extraction of the tar sands. The 'green stuff' is forest. The numbers by the assessment do NOT even begin to account for the carbon sequestration that exists in that forest AND the continual carbon sink it provides. Basically, the tar sands extraction completely and severely removes an entire global carbon sink. There is absolutely no number incorporated in the State Department assessment regarding this loss of carbon sequestration in figure ES-10. The numbers ONLY account for EMISSIONS from the process.

The propaganda also is that over time the forests will be replaced through restoration when open pit mining is finished. That would be a lie, so these forests are permanently lost. Entire carbon sinks are gone. The open pit mining is ONLY one of the methods used to remove the tar sands oil. The methods damage the land so severely there is no restoring it because the oil at the surface will not provide for restoration and the water within these forests are polluted. If there is ever to be return of these carbon sinks it would require centuries if not millennium. Certainly these carbon sink forest with their sequestration won't be returned in my generation or the next. Will never happen.

I ask myself how desperate is the petroleum industry? Are they the least bit conservationists in any form? The answer is no. There are innumerable examples over the history of this industry to PROVE the inhumanity through employee deaths and the complete disregard of the natural world. The damage this industry causes on a global basis is nearly inconceivable. If this industry continues habitable areas for human beings, yet alone wildlife, will disappear. We are already seeing that in hydraulic fracturing. This extraction has the same reality. So the more the industry continues in this manner in Canada the more land that will be lost to an uninhabitable status.

Should I believe the absolute worse about the activities of this industry? Absolutely.

The method of extraction of the Canadian Oil Sands is called "in situ". The "in site" method of extracting oil sands should be illegal.

The open pit mining of these oil sands is the SUPERFICIAL method of extraction. There are bitumen deposits that are SOLID below the superficial open pit mine. This so called mining is far worse than any form of coal mining. "In situ" mining means 'within the site.' It is actually a medical term. How sick is that? But, the process is to use WATER, very precious water supplies and heat it. Thousands and thousands of gallons, ultimately millions and millions of gallons of hot water injected into the ground as steam to boil the solid bitumen below these superficial open pit mining sites.

The solid bitumen boils with the injected steam and then is pumped out of the ground. There was a unexpected side effect of this method and this is getting slightly off topic in regard to measuring the carbon dioxide produced except this side effect destroys more of the land and forest. 

The injection sites leak. They leak the oil that has been dissolved. Not all the liquified bitumen comes to the surface in pumps. The process of injection of steam liquifies the land. There is no controlling it and the leaks can travel in any direction and to any depth or to the surface. The land integrity disappears.

When clean up of the discovered leaks took place, the loss of vegetation (plants and forests) was 7.5 kilgrams to 1 barrel of oil.

This extraction method as reported in this assessment by the State Department doesn't even begin to measure the loss of carbon sinks and/or the tremendous amount of energy used to heat water which is done with fossil fuels. The estimate in this State Department report is grossly wrong, not just a slight bit wrong. 

The PROPER role of the US State Department with Canada in regard to this method of extracting fossil fuels is to condemn it and insist on high tariffs for any amount coming into the borders of the USA.

How much carbon sequestration occurs with a forest. This answer comes from a highly regarded university, Tufts University.

Sequestration: How much CO2 does a tree take up? (click here)
The issue of sequestration is very complicated. Sequestration rates vary greatly according to the age, composition, and location of the forests and the type of soil.

The information TCI used for its computer brochure was taken from: Forests and Global Change, Vol. 2, Forest Management Opportunities for Mitigation of Carbon Emissions. Neil Sampson and Dwight Hair, Washington, 1996.

Northeast, maple-beech-birch forests

25 year old forest: 12,000 lbs of carbon / 25 = 480 lbs of C per acre per year x 44/12 =1,760 lbs of CO2 per acre per year

120 year old forest: 128,000 lbs of carbon / 120 = 1,066 lbs of C per year per acre x 44/12 =3,909 lbs of CO2 per acre per year

Tree density varies, and we used an average of 700 trees per acre (this number was taken from DOE’s "Sector-Specific Issues and Reporting Methodologies Supporting the General Guidelines for the Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases under Sections 1605(b) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992")...

In order to determine the loss of carbon sequestration with these oil sands a survey of the forests and the ages of the trees estimated to understand the NEGATIVE number of CARBON EMISSIONS affiliated with these processes would have to take place. The resultant number would be astronomical. It is only one of the reasons scientists in the USA stand in opposition of this horrid industrial use of this land and the cooperation of the USA in allowing it to occur and/or allowing use of our pipelines for its transport.

The lands currently EXPLOITED by Trans-Canada needs to be claimed as Wildlands and the processes ended. There is no limit on the damage to the land by this process and/or the fisheries polluted by any runoff through overland flow of rain and the devastating effects of the leaks. 

The pipeline is a given NO. If there is any acknowledgement of these fossil fuels as a neutral fuel the same as crude oil, they are lying and there needs to be action taken against them and Trans Canada.

To sum this up for now. There are huge issues affiliated with this assessment including an attack on sovereignty in setting a precedent by the US State Department's willingness to conduct eminent domain over land in Nebraska to give as a gift to a commercial enterprise outside the borders of the USA. This pipeline is not only offensive from a fossil fuel assessment, it is offensive to the sovereign nature of the USA and it's people.