Please, help us because we are having a major problem in Greece with our fish...
They are killing lots of fish and Greenpeace is helping the Greek seas by giving you the opportunity to participate. Can you please fill the form so we gather more activists' forms.
Please spend a minute to fill the form.
http://bit.ly/vuv6gm
You can provide us some help...
I think the Greeks have more pressing things to worry about.
You might say they have bigger fish to fry, if they had any fish.
(BTW, not all of us can read Cyrillic)
Indeed we are worried about everything these days.
But this is a way to help...
Greenpeace makes the world a better place .... I'm not sure.
It's an organisation that would have a major negative effect on the world as we know it if they had the power to complete their politics.
They promote organic grown food and work against the use of pesticids.
If we dropped pesticids and industrial produced fergilizers we would see a crop yield decrease of minimum 1/3. People will hunger.
They work against use of GMO foods.
Minimum 80% of all soya is GMO at the moment - along with other crops. Major parts of Asia will see massive hunger if GMO was dropped. Prices on meat from live stock would also sky rocket.
They work against nuclear power.
At the moment we have no substitute other than burning coal, oil and propane/buthane. This would give a major increase on CO2 emissions. We can not expand hydro-electric without destroying big eco-systems. Windturbines only works when the wind is blowing - without a supply backbone they are not worth alot.
Greenpeace for a better world - no thank you. They do not have (or want) the knowledge about how to run the world.
-Fletcher
Sadly I agree with Fletcher. The goals of greenpeace are honourable but until there is a practical replacement for current technologies which greenpeace finds unacceptable then greenpeace demands aren't viable.
Don't misunderstand, I'm not a greenpeace fan. However, some of the stuff they spout should be considered. Genetically modified foods are cool and have really helped, but the companies that do that stuff are getting out of hand. Seeds that don't allow reproduction; patented seed that they sue people for having in their fields when the bugs, bird and wind put the seeds there; and weird combinations of genetic traits that could cause serious damage because there's no controls on pollination.
Pesticides are what keep the bugs from getting our food before it comes to market; a good thing. But folks go nuts with it and spray enough to cause the fields to glow in the dark. They don't consider run off or how deep the water table is and then wonder why their dog died. Politicians see it as a hot button and cater to hysteria often making the problem far worse than it really is.
At this time nuclear power cannot be replaced. People don't stop to think what the implications are of shutting down existing power plants and just run around like Chicken Little being idiots. However, our power plants are getting old and are not of the best design since we quit improving them years ago. We need new to replace the old and a reasonable way to handle wastes.
So, since there's no middle-of-the-road reasonable organization saying, "We need to do something carefully considered and logical", we're stuck with greenpeace.
Sigh.
The only part I don't totally agree with
But folks go nuts with it and spray enough to cause the fields to glow in the dark.
Pesticides are so expense, as are fertilizers that it is not good business to waste chemicals. Farmers are business men. They want to make a profit/living like anyone else. Therefore, in general they try to be efficient to maximize profit. Not saying that they never over use chemicals but, it is not the best way to make money.
Good point, and I agree with you about the family farmer; he live there with his family. However, the big corporate farmers don't care; they delegate the spraying to a manager that tell the employee to go spray. The employee doesn't care either, he just takes off and sprays. He doesn't live there, he lives in town. He just wants to put his day in, get paid and go home. The manager doesn't care, he just wants to clear his 'to do' list and go home to another part of town. The corporate officer doesn't live anywhere near there, he couldn't care less.
The neighbors downhill that get their water from a well care.
draythomp:
... patented seed that they sue people for having in their fields when the bugs, bird and wind put the seeds there...
That's untrue. If you're going to cite the flax farmer in Canada's case take note that he purposefully harvested (for reseeding purposes) patented seed that had blown into his field.
draythomp:
However, the big corporate farmers don't care; they delegate the spraying to a manager that tell the employee to go spray. The employee doesn't care either, he just takes off and sprays.
Again, no farmer -- corporate or not -- is going to spray if it doesn't make economic sense. The field will always be scouted for pests before any spraying takes place; if they didn't do this then they wouldn't know what pesticide to use!
In California's central valley where I worked for many years, they routinely (that's on a schedule(as in without checking)) spray both weed killer and pesticide on Monsanto based seed plants. Mostly, this is done with spray rigs mounted to large tractors; the ones with four giant tires to elevate them over the plants. If you drive down the road beside one of these operations, it looks like a fog surrounding the tractor and the driver has a closed cab with a respirator. It seems that they have farmed there for so long now they know exactly what chemicals to use at what time to suppress the particular weed or bug that come up on a schedule like clockwork. Seems there are only a couple of broad spectrum chemicals that serve the purposes just fine. They also use crop duster planes to scatter fertilizer, weed control fluids and pesticides over crops in some areas.
The central valley has no outlet to the sea and ALL rainwater is channeled and used in farming. There is also a lot of water brought in from the central canal from the Sacramento valley. With no outlet, all water that doesn't evaporate, is eventually going to be found in the water table. This area was dominant in the restriction of DDT many years ago when it was found in a swampy area that was preserved for duck and geese. Seems it was poisoning the ducklings and goslings to the point where there wasn't enough calcium in their bodies to form bones and bills. I witnessed this, and the damage was far greater than ever made the news.
I'm a staunch conservative and totally believe in chemical warfare on pests and weeds, but I'm conservative there also. These corporate farms operate based on timelines, schedules and production quotas like all good businesses and fully understand the chemistry of growing crops. They don't consider the implications of chemical run off, its concentration by transpiration and evaporation, or leaching into the water table. Once it leaves their factory (fields), it's not in their thoughts anymore. That's why the recreation area known as Buena Vista is fed entirely from the central canal. The engineers at the time realized the water would eventually become poisonous so they created the lakes such that no run off from the valley farms could reach it. The few other lakes and streams are fed from the mountain snow cap. Strangely, there are a few catfish and koi farms in the area. These are run near the few mountain streams so they can refill from mountain surface water and ground water, when used, is run through large reverse osmosis devices on site to remove salt and chemical build up.
Corporations are necessary to concentrate resources, improve production, and increase diversity, but they need a larger point of view than next season's stock price. As CowJam said earlier, Greenpeace's motives are honorable, but their ideal would cause widespread poverty and starvation. But, that doesn't mean they're completely off the mark and should be discounted.
[quote author=Fletcher Chr link=topic=77606.msg590701#msg590701 date=1320706366]
Greenpeace makes the world a better place .... I'm not sure.
It's an organisation that would have a major negative effect on the world as we know it if they had the power to complete their politics.
They promote organic grown food and work against the use of pesticids.
If we dropped pesticids and industrial produced fergilizers we would see a crop yield decrease of minimum 1/3. People will hunger.
They work against use of GMO foods.
Minimum 80% of all soya is GMO at the moment - along with other crops. Major parts of Asia will see massive hunger if GMO was dropped. Prices on meat from live stock would also sky rocket.[/quote]
You'll be surprised how much "food" (grains) is used to supply factory farms, which are very inefficient.
http://www.infographicsarchive.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/peta_info-truthabouteating.jpg
So the solution is to phase out factory farming. That will reduce the demand for grain to less than half its existing amount, actually reducing average food prices. (Note that I said "phase out" rather than "ban" since we want a smooth transition, not a sudden switch. The economy hates large derivative terms...)
The central valley has no outlet to the sea and ALL rainwater is channeled and used in farming.
That is factually incorrect. The Central Valley has huge river systems (Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers being the two largest) that drains naturally through the San Francisco Bay to the sea. Some of the water is pumped into canal systems and reused for irrigation and also export to the L.A. basin, but most rain fall and snow pack drains to sea.
Lefty
Yes I quite like nuclear energy. (According to GSU) about 3kg of natural uranium can power the entire USA with surplus energy. I like those numbers.
about 3kg of natural uranium can power the entire USA with surplus energy. I like those numbers.
That also has to be factually incorrect. 'Natural' uranium needs to undergo an extensive and expensive enrichment process before it can be used as nuclear fuel. I'm sure 3kg of uranium ore (yellow cake) would not power my Arduino for long, let alone the entire USA.
That is factually incorrect. The Central Valley has huge river systems (Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers being the two largest) that drains naturally through the San Francisco Bay to the sea. Some of the water is pumped into canal systems and reused for irrigation and also export to the L.A. basin, but most rain fall and snow pack drains to sea.
Lefty
and that is factually incorrect. The Sacramento river flows through the central valley and exits into San Francisco Bay through the more mountainous terrain of the Northern Valley where there is less farming, and where there are actual family farms still existing. The Southern valley has the San Joaquin river completely under control. There are weirs every few miles and take off points for local irrigation. That diversion of the water used to be considered a major cause of salt water incursion into the San Francisco Bay. Yes, they do allow a small amount of water from the Merced, Tule, and San Joaquin river to get to the delta, but that is mostly to keep the channels clear in case of flood. The Kings river currently has no outlet at all, it is totally used in the valley. The channel is still there to protect from flood. The Southern valley has a series of tiny seasonal streams and a couple of actual rivers that have no outlets such as the Kern river. That's why they had to use aqueduct water for the Buena Vista lakes. This is similar to the way water is controlled in the LA basin area. It has a number of rivers fed from the snow pack (such as it is), but if you follow it, the water doesn't reach the ocean except in flood conditions.
A lot of the Central Valley is semi arid, meaning desert. From about Modesto south to the mountains bordering LA, the area is sandy and hot mostly made by the inland lake that used to be there when water levels were high pre ice age and a century and a half of water control engineering has created one of the most profitable farming areas in the world, fed by controlling the water that used to flow through. At one time you could look at google maps and follow the San Joaquin river. There would be places where water would show up and dry sandy areas where no water flowed. This is caused by the different times the satellite pictures were taken. That river is allowed to the sea to prevent flooding and provide some recreation areas...oh also to shut up Greenpeace's constant complaining about the wetlands area. Even the Sacramento is controlled, but it is allowed to flow more freely; it's cooler in the North.
Back when I was a kid we would have fun digging in the yard near Lemoore, CA . When we got down about 5 feet, we hit the water table and the hole would get wet. If we dug deeper we had a kid size swimming pool with lots of mud to throw around at each other and the neighbors pick up truck. When I was a teenager, I told the smaller kids about that and we tried to find it again, at 7 feet, we still were shoveling out sand. They gave up. Now the water table is quite a ways down and there are rumors of ground subsidence of some inches because the water level is lowering each year.
Back in the 80s the people of the delta blamed the central valley for the increased salt incursion because they were using up the water that used to flow through, the people of the South Central valley blamed Los Angeles for the lack of irrigation water provided from the aqueduct because they were watering their lawns; the people of LA were blaming the South Central valley for the price of water because they were using it to farm. Now, they all blame it on global warming.
So, yes, I wasn't totally factually correct, there are some highly controlled outlets to SF bay to prevent flooding and maintain a minimal river delta, but then again, neither are any of the articles I've seen on the water supply in California.
That also has to be factually incorrect. 'Natural' uranium needs to undergo an extensive and expensive enrichment process before it can be used as nuclear fuel. I'm sure 3kg of uranium ore (yellow cake) would not power my Arduino for long, let alone the entire USA.
On a roll today lefty?? The poster just misread it a bit. The actual item from GSU is:
Even with the necessity of enrichment, it still takes only about 3 kg of natural uranium to supply the energy needs of one American for a year.
Which I take with a grain of salt as well. 3Kg of precipitated yellow cake per person at over 300 million people is almost a billion kg to supply the needs of the population for a year??? That doesn't appear to include industry. The US government says we use about 7 billion barrels of oil a year for all purposes. These numbers don't line up at all. There's only a 7 to 1 ratio of oil (barrel) to yellow cake? I have got to be missing something here. How much uranium is there in this country??
Oh, they only push the percentage up a little bit to make yellow cake into nuclear fuel. IIRC they take it from .7% up to 2% or so U235, so 3Kg of yellow cake could power an arduino for a very long time, if you happen to have a nuclear reactor in your yard.
and that is factually incorrect. The Sacramento river flows through the central valley and exits into San Francisco Bay through the more mountainous terrain of the Northern Valley where there is less farming, and where there are actual family farms still existing. The Southern valley has the San Joaquin river completely under control.
Again not correct. The Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers join near the delta town of Antioch near the center point of the central valley where they then flow to the S.F. bay, both rivers use the same outlet to the sea, through the Carquinez straits 2 miles north of my house.
About 40 miles (64 km) from the mouth, the river draws abreast to the western flank of Stockton, one of the basin's largest cities. From here to the mouth, the river is dredged as part of a navigation project, the Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel. Past the head of tide, amid the many islands of the delta, the San Joaquin is joined by two more tributaries: the Calaveras River and the larger Mokelumne. The river grows to almost 5,000 feet (1,500 m) wide before ending at its confluence with the Sacramento River, in Antioch, forming the head of Suisun Bay. The combined waters from the two rivers then flow west through the Carquinez Strait and San Francisco Bay into the Pacific.[3]
Lefty
I stand corrected. It's hard for me to think of Antioch as the center of the valley because my job at the time topped off just N of Fresno. Below that there are several stretches of San Joaquin that are used for sand riding by the local kids and their quads. They do the same thing in the river beds of the Tule and Kings during the summer when the flow has been diverted. They hunt frogs above the weirs on these rivers and sometimes take the "Chevy to the levee" for a little swim.
But this makes me wonder, where the heck is the 3Maf of water that is supplied (allegedly) by the San Joaquin coming from? Are they only counting the spring run off from the Sierras? Do the rivers north of Merced carry that much water? Because it sure ain't coming from the water sources south of Fresno; there's too many dry patches visible from the highways that cross the rivers to support that.
3Kg of yellow cake could power an arduino for a very long time, if you happen to have a nuclear reactor in your yard.
Well, no. I don't think 3Kg of yellow cake will end up giving you a critical mass of anything fissionable...
of course not. Yellow cake would have to have the impurities removed, then enriched to a little over 2%, then......
But, there's enough energy in there to power an arduino just like there's enough power in the water behind hoover dam to power a city, but you can't throw wires in lake Mead and expect to get shocked.
