Our World and Everything in It

The sun is getting brighter and hotter. We’ll feel it again on Friday when the temperature is supposed to hit 89. To stand with bare skin in the sun really burns hot regardless of a breeze. So we’re told to wear sunscreen, lots of sunscreen, and try to stay out of it.   

I do use it, but wondered why my face felt like I have gravel under my skin whenever I applied sunscreen, especially the really good stuff. And I get darker and darker anyway. I’ve got a pretty good tan considering I wear 45 SPF, a big hat, and long sleeve men’s shirts for yard work. I’ve been telling my doctor for years that I do apply sunscreen, lots of it, but I tan anyway. Now I read this article that the FDA was warned to provide more information about sunscreen.

 According to the article on World Wire:

Sunscreens pose scientifically well-documented risks. While well known for over a decade, they remain unregulated by the FDA, and ignored by the industry.

Sunscreens are based on six ingredients, some of which actively penetrate the skin, accumulate in the body, and have been identified in urine and breast milk. More ominously, these ingredients have toxic hormonal effects, known technically as “endocrine disruptive.” Evidence for these effects has been well documented over the last decade. This includes stimulation of human breast cancer cells in test tube experiments, and increased uterine growth in immature female rats following skin painting or feeding.

Of major concern, and still ignored by the FDA, is the increasing addition to sunscreens of unlabeled atom or molecule size zinc oxide or titanium dioxide particles. Technically known as nanoparticles, they increase the durability and effectiveness of these products. However, as reported in over two dozen scientific publications since 2003, including those by an Environmental Protection Agency research team and the International Center for Technology Assessment, nanoparticles can penetrate the skin, invade blood vessels, and produce devastating distant toxic effects.

I think I’ll stick to just the big and big shirt until this mess gets straightened out.

Read more: http://world-wire.com/news/0808070001.html

At one hundred kilowatts per hour per for one device, Swell Fuels lever operated pivoting float is something we should be using right now. A World Wire article stated: “The patent-pending device uses a pivoting float and a lever arm that unfolds to capture the up and down motion of ocean waves, producing electricity in the process.” How ingenious.

Swell Fuels is ready to go with this product but guess what? Politics and special interest groups are blocking this and many more innovative ways of creating energy for the future. We’re being told by many different articles including one in the Detroit Free Press this weekend about wind power, that the costs and time involved in alternative energy is too much, that’s why we’re not moving forward. Baloney. Innovation is being blocked to say the least.

Read more about this curious but effective invention: http://world-wire.com/news/0808120002.html.

Americans may be looking at 4-day workweeks soon in efforts to offset energy costs. Both Utah and Idaho’s state employee are on 4 tens. Some good things are happening as a result of the energy crisis. Not only are workweeks getting shorter, but employees are also allowed to work from home more and more. This can be good. This can be bad.

I can weigh in on the shortened workweek.  I worked 4 ten-hour days back in 1984. The extra two hours were split between morning and afternoon. My schedule started an hour earlier and ended an hour later than usual. So the bad thing was getting up earlier and getting home later. With longer hours, you might be a little more tired at days end also so after-work-projects aren’t likely to happen. But if you’re running your kids around most evenings anyway, this shouldn’t be a problem.

The real problem with 4-day workweeks is latch key kids. If working parents can tackle this problem then the rest of the attributes for working 4 tens are all positive. For one thing, your car is spared the trip. If you don’t use that up running all over town on Friday, then it’s a plus. It was reported that Utah figured all of its employees collectively saved $100,000 in gas money by not working on Friday. One woman said she only saved $72.00 for gas money during the month but finds the extra time spent with her kids invaluable.

From an employer’s point of view, a successful switch to 4-day workweeks depends on associated companies that work a 5-day workweek. Back in the early 90’s I actually worked a 3-day workweek for the same salary as 5 days.  I negotiated that by showing all the work I was doing that really belonged to others on the payroll. I got my way, a 3 day work week with Tuesday’s and Friday’s off, because I was able to show I was not only doing all of my duties in 5 days, but a bunch of other people’s also. Since I was a purchasing agent, and did payroll the 3-day problem came up. Tuesday was a slow day at work, and well Fridays, let’s get real here. I told my employer quite frankly that not much of anything would get purchased on a Friday anyway. Most of those orders will not hit someone’s desk until Monday. You’re not likely to get a sales rep to come around on Friday either. It’s like Friday “work” days dissolve somewhere around noon for quite a lot of professions. Most things are stalled until Monday because someone is usually missing on Friday. My employer acknowledged this. He was notorious for disappearing on Fridays. Monday and Friday off would have been sweet but that would have been pushing the envelope. I acknowledged that I needed to be there for payroll on Mondays. The best thing was when the company decided I needed to work 40 hours again. My wages almost doubled.

Like ABC news stated this morning, now is the time to negotiate for shared hours, shorter workweeks, and/or working from home. I did it when there was no energy crisis, late 80’s and early 90’s. A good employer should have no problem paying for a job well done regardless of the time involved. If you have a job that doesn’t involve other associates on 5 day work weeks, you’ve got a good case for a 4 day workweek. Prove you work faster and more efficient than most and you’ll probably get your way. It’s win win right now.

Once you get used to 4 days, and really using that Friday in an organized way so you can kick back on Saturday AND Sunday, you’ll probably find you do much less running around altogether. The solitary time away from the rat race is priceless. It might be good for America to learn to relax and quit all the running around. It would certainly be good for the environment.  

The U.S. has an overabundant supply of natural gas. We’re being told that it’s a fuel for the future. Other countries are creating cars that run on natural gas and the U.S. is losing out. Are we?

I heard on ABC news the other day that natural gas is going up 22% this winter when we use the stuff to heat our homes. Looking around at some of the country’s newspapers it appears the increase may be higher. Parts of Pennsylvania expect over a 33% increase, and Frankfurt, Kentucky claims that natural gas is up 70% from last year. If you’re wondering why natural gas is going up when it’s oil that’s high not the gas, and oil never seemed to affect the price of natural gas before, it’s because of demand.

So here we are again with a fossil fuel that has to be extracted, and boy are we devastating some beautiful places in America extracting the stuff, while demand continues to rise so the costs are getting out of hand no differently than oil. And we’re still screaming for offshore drilling for more oil? This should be a big kick in the pants to get away from fossil fuel forever. What is it we’re not getting? 

Natural gas prices weren’t all that bad until oil got so outrageously expensive. Industries that can either use oil or natural gas have switched to gas. Meanwhile, we started using more natural gas to produce electricity. Natural gas consumption always used to be predominantly in the winter months, for heating purposes, now because of industry and demand for electricity for A/C, natural gas prices aren’t fluctuating cyclically. They’re just plain going up and up.

Just dandy huh? We need to get off this merry go round and realize that in the future we must adapt to a potpourri of energy sources, like some wind, some solar, some geothermal, etc., or we’re just going to keep hitting the same demand wall.

Calling for the U.S. to move solely to electricity may sound like we’re putting all our eggs in one basket too but electricity is the one source of power that appears to know no bounds for it’s generation. All types of things can be converted to electricity. With the advent of the hydrogen fuel cell and PEM’s, electricity will have even more ways to keep us in power in the future.

There was a reason Bush reluctantly put the polar bears on the endangered list but then curiously omitted protection for their habitat. Not so curious anymore. It seems in the latest round of attacks on the environment by the Bush administration and more than likely in support of oil, coal, and the natural gas industries, the president doesn’t find habitat protection necessary. To quote an article on NRDC’s website, the president will argue, “that studying and protecting the places that are essential to species survival is unnecessary. Specifically, the Department of Interior is planning to insert language into all future critical habitat designations that argues that these protections have no value in species protection.” Ah and Dirk Kempthorne, Secy. of Interior is at it again.

Protecting animals but allowing their habitat to go unprotected is so straight out of the dogma of big oil and other fossil fuel industries that we don’t even have to wonder why this underhanded push is happening. I say underhanded because the same article on Defender’s website stated that: “The first attack, contained in a rider on the House version of the Defense Department appropriations bill, would have arguably given the Secretary of the Interior sole discretion regarding where and when-and whether-to designate critical habitat for endangered species. Although the appropriations bill still contains a damaging ESA exemption for the Department of Defense, the more radical rider was defeated by the House on May 21.” Sneaky.

The Bush administration may not get their way the second time around either but there are other rotten ways of doing things.  The administration appears to be overly restricting funds for species protection by the USFWS. Bush only requested a measly $9 million dollars for it this year even though the agency knows it would take $153 million or more because there is a backlog. Congress even requested more money for the agency in the past to no avail. So no one is actually keeping track of or properly protecting our wildlife habitats because there is no money.

This is a “frightful” disregard for living things. If this administration can so ruthlessly overlook one natural resource for another, oil vs. animal habitat, than it’s not a stretch to think humanity is not being overlooked in the process either. We’re not suffering all that different a scenario from the animals on the endangered species list really. By continuing with the quest for oil and possibly more fossil fuels, our habitat won’t be around much longer either. What is it people don’t get? The earth is a closed system. If we put too much pollution into it, it will eventually break down. If we go on the way we are, we are no better than a cancer to our environment.  Yet this administration is destroying our habitat right under our noses while we go on believing someone is looking out for our best interests.

I hope that someone isn’t specifically Dick Cheney. Because when I watch what’s happening all I keep remembering is an article I read back in 2004 about Cheney. John Perry Barlow, a former Cheney supporter, said, “He has the least interest in human beings of anyone I have ever met.” That explains a lot.

http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/030528.asp.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/6450422/the_curse_of_dick_cheney/.

Taking a cue from Germany, Oregon is installing 594 solar panels along the highway at Interstates 4 and 205 interchange in Tualatin, Oregon. I blogged about Germany’s efforts at installing a double row of solar panels along the autobahn. Finally, someone over here realizes the potential for using that wasted right of way.  http://www.blogsmonroe.com/world/2007/10/31/germany-jump-starts-alternative-energy-push/.

According to an ENS Newswire relative to Oregon’s solar panel installation, “Electricity for the highway interchange is provided by PGE or Portland General Electric and the added solar power will be handled through a net metering arrangement. The solar panels will produce electricity during the day, supplying power onto the PGE grid, and PGE will return an equivalent amount of power at night to light the interchange.” Good deal. Whatever energy can be saved or used should be.

Oregon has a pretty rough RPS or Renewable Portfolio Standards that requires the state to supply 25 percent of its electricity needs from new renewable sources by 2025. Michigan’s energy bills that got watered down by the Senate included an RPS that was moderate in comparison. I think it was 10% alternative energy by 2015. We don’t have much of anything right now in Michigan and this is just the latest at how far behind we are falling in the game of showing a respectable RPS to entice future companies and job commitments to our state. It’s important if we’re going to compete with states that are planning bigger reductions in fossil fuel use at a quicker rate.

Read more about the Oregon’s solar highway: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2008/2008-08-09-091.asp

I just did a blog about our becoming accumstomed to violence, killing, and guns. Then I read my e-mail that STATE WILDLIFE AGENCY PERSONNEL in Alaska illegally staked out a breeding den/area for wolves, and aerial shot and killed 14 of them. The wolves were parents to 14 little pups. They shot all the pups in the head at close range.

View this video of 4 week old wolf pups and imagine plugging the cute little things in the head. It takes a heartless person to do this.

http://www.everythingwolf.com/sitewide/videolib/p1020310.wmv  

On the same website as the video, I read about people adopting wolf cubs, and even potty training wolf cubs. This is counter to the image of wolves as blood thirsty, indiscriminate killers.  

http://www.everythingwolf.com/forum/threadview.aspx?thread=1340p1.   

The big execution in Alaska was to boost caribou populations. There are approximately 950,000 caribou in Alaska. How many caribou do we need? What’s the target, a million?

 http://www.adfg.state.ak.us/pubs/notebook/biggame/caribou.php.

Alaskans are outraged over this aerial killing movement and are moving to “end the Board of Game’s barbaric aerial hunting of wolves through a ballot measure,” according to Defenders of Wildlife. Defenders website has a drive that ends today to help this ballot initiative with new ads. It also said that: “On August 26th voters can pass this ballot measure and band this awful practice before another deadly season begins.”

Defenders of Wildlife is “helping Alaskans for Wildlife, a coalition of local grassroots activists, hunters, and citizens who secured the 55,000 signatures to put this measure on the ballot. Already, they have reached thousands of voters across the state with their hard-hitting mailings.”

Collecting 55,000 signatures is a daunting task in the heart of hunting territory like Alaska, but everyone involved is close to meeting their goal of collecting $80,000 and running ads that will get voters out to vote for this ballot measure. The ads essentially say, “Real hunters don’t shoot wildlife from airplanes.”

I think aerial hunting is gutless. I also think shooting helpless pups is heartless. And I’m starting to think humans need to be kept in check more than animal populations. We’re starting to show our animalistic tendencies far too much, forgetting about empathy and compassion for all living things in our world.

http://www.defenders.org/newsroom/press_releases_folder/2008/07_23_2008 _statement_regarding_illegal_killing_of_14_wolf_pups_in_alaska.php

I was reading about the shooter who shot 3 teens and wounded another in a wooded area on the Wisconsin/Michigan border and all I could think about was the Bush administration/NRA push to allow loaded guns in national parks. Just what we need.

http://www.wkowtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=8774082.

We should be more concerned about this issue because with the help of the NRA, the 25-year ban on loaded guns in parks might dissolve before Bush leaves office. We’re not talking big rifles or shotguns but CONCEALED HANDGUNS too.

So guns become a reality in parks and you’re walking along Sleeping Bear Dunes or a portion of the North Country National Scenic Trail and some nut shoots you. You end up buried in the sand dunes or God-knows-where along that trail, at least until a bear or vultures find your carcass. Back at the camp all anyone knows is that you went for a little hike in the morning or before dinner and never came back. The nut with a gun hasn’t a witness in site, and hearing a gunshot has become commonplace in parks.

Of course this can happen with the present ban on loaded guns in parks too. Nefarious people don’t follow rules anyway. But at least the sound of a gun would resonate to someone that something is not right, whether an animal attack or human attack. 

We already have a horrible homicide record as a free country. We’re getting a little too used to guns and killing, don’t you think? We accept guns too readily as our only means of protection. Protectionism has its place, but it appears to me that since 9/11, with the aid of the federal government, we’ve become much too fearful as a people. It encourages extremist actions like carrying concealed weapons everywhere. We’re willing to give up too many of our rights also because we’re afraid. And unfortunately, it seems that we’re unique in our fear.  When England’s subway was bombed by terrorists, I remember many Brits riding the subway again as soon as possible with the retort that, “We can’t let them have the upper hand now can we?” Ditto for other countries. Then again, they’ve weathered more wars on home turf than us. Still I feel we have been targeted for fearmongering as a way of bullying us into thinking we need a loaded gun to get through everyday life, like an outing in a park.

The gun won’t help me if a nut takes aim from somewhere. I won’t know what hit me. I don’t think if I were jogging alone through a park that I could draw my weapon if suddenly ambushed from the side either. More than likely the assailant would get the gun away from me. 

If the attack is from a mountain lion or bear, good luck getting a deadly shot on them, especially with a handgun. They’re on you before you can act. They’ll rip your arm off before the trigger is pulled or the gun even makes it out. I’d probably shoot myself in the foot in a Barney Phife move and assure my doom.

Seems like owning a dog would be as good if not safer to take along on a hike in the park, and boy are there plenty of those in the shelters looking to loyally defend an owner just for a home.

While the present administration and the NRA stoke our fears to add more places to allow more types of guns, studies show that possession of guns is only upping the homicide rate in America. We’re killing each other, not terrorists! Terrorism would have taken a bigger hit long ago by cutting off its funding from oil profits.  

Congress began viewing alternative energy sources at the end of the 90’s and we should have kept in that direction as a way to stop our oil addiction and the money flowing to the Middle East that helped fund terrorism. I’m reading that it is funded more and more by heroin now. Lately big oil profits in the Persian Gulf have produced a model city like Dubai, a huge metropolis and the Arab wish for a huge financial center. Pretty soon major corporations will fund terrorism over there. We missed our chance to nip the terrorist problem in the bud long ago by getting away from oil. It brought power to a region that basically had nothing else going for it. Who is outsmarting whom? The Middle East preys on our addictions to oil and heroin. There is no gun to combat that.

Unfortunately, since 9/11 we’ve lost more rights due to our fears, and are basically headed back to the old west, where everyone walked around with a holster or hid a pistol in their boot.

More info on guns and homicides vs. protection: http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/13/93/7e.pdf

WXYZ posted new safety guidelines for eating fish caught in Michigan. I knew that no one is supposed to eat catfish or carp from in or around the Detroit River, but I didn’t know that all other fish was to be limited to one meal per MONTH? That’s been a rule for 20 years.

The new rules state that kids under 15 or child bearing women should never eat any small mouth bass or walleye over 18 inches. And do not eat carp, catfish, or white bass from the Saginaw Bay and River and Tittabawassee River.

I went to the Fish Advisory website at michigan.gov and read about how lake fish should be cooked:

Cut off all the fat.

Remove or poke holes in the fish’s skin before cooking. This will help the fat and chemicals to drain off the fish.

Bake, broil, or grill the fish on a rack. Throw away the drippings.

Do not eat the guts, head, skin, bones, or dark fatty areas.

Do not re-use the oil that was used to deep or pan fry the fish.

Sorry, but these directions remind me of a label on a bottle of pesticide where it says to use gloves, do not get on skin, in eyes, or mouth, wash everything thoroughly, do not use sprayer for anything else, etc.

The most important thing I did read was: Mercury stays in the filet of the fish and cannot be cut or cooked away. Use the MDCH guides to choose fish that are low in mercury.

After reading this all I could think of is my husband’s friend, an avid fisherman, who tossed mercury off as something that can just be cut away. I didn’t think so, but you can’t talk to a fisherman. This one happens to be single, so at least he’s not taking it home to the kids.

http://www.wxyz.com/alnews/local/story.aspx?content_id=7d15f21b-a073-4604-afc5-4d09431d1952

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/FishAdvisory03_67354_7.pdf

This Sunday’s article in the Detroit Free Press about conservation easements was pretty enlightening to me. I thought I’d share it. I don’t think I’m the only one who wishes their property would remain as is into the future. I don’t want anyone cutting down my apple, pear, and cherry trees, or anything else I’ve nurtured to grow. I want the wooded parts to stay wooded, and the animal habitat left alone.

The couple in the article has acreage on Beaver Island outside of Petoskey where many of the locals see the encroaching development. This couple decided to keep their property as is in the future by getting a conservation easement. This is an agreement that limits development, and protects property forever.

Hurray. There is something a private property owner can do to keep development to a minimum and protect wildlife habitat forever. I’m thinking about all the wild open fields that use to be near my house that went the way of subdivisions that are only half filled. All that habitat, trees, grass, bushes, and shrubs were mowed down to create those egg frying concrete subdivisions by summer, that really turn bleak and empty in winter. I’m thinking about what a conservation easement might have done. With only half the houses, these same subdivisions might have retained small areas of woods, open grasses, bogs, and huge, ancient trees that can’t possibly be replaced in a hundred years.

I also think of all the people I know that bought property “up north” in Michigan for the express purpose of being in the boonies. That list of people is growing. As it grows, the wild areas shrink, clearing areas for the homestead.

The couple in the article said that we as individuals have to protect the land. Well, if you’re someone who wants the view out your window to remain that way, you may want to try for a conservation easement.

For more info: http://www.smlcland.org/about.php