People might think that this site is about the future, so what do I care.     The answer to wake them is that our future start now, this minute.

16 December, 2009
The Independent

At first glance, the Copenhagen climate summit seems like a Salvador Dali dreamscape. I just saw Archbishop Desmond Tutu being followed by a swarm of Japanese students who were dressed as aliens and carrying signs saying "Take Me To Your Leader" and "Is Your Species Crazy?". Before that, a group of angry black-clad teenage protesters who were carrying spray cans started quoting statistics to me about how much carbon dioxide the atmosphere can safely absorb. (It's 350 parts per million they pointed out, before sucking their teeth.) Before that, I saw a couple in a pantomime cow costume being attacked by the police, who accused them of throwing stones with their hooves.

But the surrealism runs deeper and darker than this. Inside the Bella Centre, the rich world's leaders are defiantly ignoring their scientists and refusing to sign a deal that will prevent our climate from being dramatically destabilised. The scientific consensus shows the rich world needs to cut 40 per cent of our emissions of warming gases from 1990 levels by 2020 if we're going to have even a 50-50 chance of staying this side of the Point of No Return, when the Earth's natural processes start to break down and warming becomes unstoppable. Yet the scientists at Climate Analytics calculate our governments are offering a dismal 8-12 per cent cut – and once you factor in all the loopholes and accounting tricks, it becomes a net increase of four per cent.

Privately, government negotiators admit there's no way the negotiations will end with the deal scientists say is necessary for our safety. Indeed, it looks possible that this conference won't deepen and broaden the Kyoto framework, but cripple it. Kyoto established a legally binding international framework to measure and reduce emissions. The cuts it required were too small, and the sanctions for breaking it were pitifully weak – but it was a start. Kyoto's current phase expires in 2012, but the treaty's authors believed its architecture would be retained and intensified after that. The developing countries assumed that's what they were here to do. But the US is proposing to simply ditch the Kyoto infrastructure – won over decades of long negotiations – and replace it with an even weaker voluntary deal. In their proposal, every country will announce cuts and stick to them out of the goodness of their hearts. No penalties, no enforcement....

Vast sheets of impenetrable multiyear ice, which can reach up to 80 metres (260 feet) thick, have for centuries blocked the path of ships seeking a quick short cut through the fabled Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific. They also ruled out the idea of sailing across the top of the world.

But David Barber, Canada's Research Chair in Arctic System Science at the University of Manitoba, said the ice was melting at an extraordinarily fast rate.

"We are almost out of multiyear sea ice in the northern hemisphere," he said in a presentation in Parliament. The little that remains is jammed up against Canada's Arctic archipelago, far from potential shipping routes.

Scientists link higher Arctic temperatures and melting sea ice to the greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming.

Barber spoke shortly after returning from an expedition that sought -- and largely failed to find -- a huge multiyear ice pack that should have been in the Beaufort Sea off the Canadian coastal town of Tuktoyaktuk.

Instead, his ice breaker found hundreds of miles of what he called "rotten ice" -- 50-cm (20-inch) thin layers of fresh ice covering small chunks of older ice.

"I've never seen anything like this in my 30 years of working in the high Arctic ... it was very dramatic," he said.

"From a practical perspective, if you want to ship across the pole, you're concerned about multiyear sea ice. You're not concerned about this rotten stuff we were doing 13 knots through. It's easy to navigate through."

Scientists have fretted for decades about the pace at which the Arctic ice sheets are shrinking. U.S. data shows the 2009 ice cover was the third-lowest on record, after 2007 and 2008....

by: Art Levine, t r u t h o u t | Report

The once-demonized nuclear industry got its biggest boost in years Thursday.

A bipartisan coalition of US senators put forward a "framework" for climate legislation that aims to dramatically increase off-shore oil drilling, ensure a "future for coal" and, above all, ramp up subsidies for the financially risky nuclear power industry. The announcement was timed, in part, to send a signal to negotiators at the climate conference in Copenhagen that the US Senate is supposedly serious about climate reform....

Comment Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use

I do not understand how the US Senators believe they can walk away from real Global Warming solutions and propose this nonsense !

A good primer to understand what one of the big issues at the Copenhagen climate talks are all about and that the "Cap and Trade" won't solve the problem of global warming.

This documentary is a film about the protest which will come from our children against the environmental contamination and degradation by our generation of parents to build even bigger crops to earn more money on the short therm with the use of pesticides etc. The youngsters will lead this protest because they are the ones to be most affected by our greed in the form of incurable illnesses they carry!

It looks that this is of topic here, but is has everything to do with the same greed by investors and multi nationals, which brings us recourse wars over oil, gas, uranium and water etc. and prevents our governments to fight Global Warming in a meaningful way.

Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use

04 January, 2010
Countercurrents.org

Trilogy Part III.

PURPOSE: This Apology to the Earth essay Part III explores the negative impact of humans on the Earth by Nuclear Technology & War. Apology to the Earth Parts 1 & 2 focused on Human Cruelty to Animals & Humans, respectively. (1) (2) The key sections of the Part III Nuclear Technology discussion are: Nuclear Bombs, Hiroshima & Nagasaki , Nuclear Power, Nuclear Waste, Radiocide, Nuclear Waste Marker Systems, Nuclear Accidents, Radiation Sickness, Nuclear Bomb Testing & Earthquakes & Nuclear Language. The main sections of the War discussion are: Ecological Footprint of War, Negative Consequences of War & Ecocide. The Conclusion section includes the Apology, a Recommendation for World Peace, a Thank you to South Africa & Comments on Human Motivations for Nuclear Technology & War....

On 10th August, more than 6,000 people took part in the recording of The Big Ask-video clip at Ostende on the Belgian coast. This was the largest event against climate change ever organised in Belgium. The film clip was made possible due to the engagement of volunteers from Friends of the Earth, and many film industry professionals including award winning director Nic Balthazar, film crews, production houses, actors, ... Music has been supplied by Hooverphonic.
The video clip has been launched, and now is the time to send it round the world, and to share it with everyone you know!

You can view the clip at www.thebigask.be After you've watched the clip, do something, ACT NOW! Send the clip to politicians in your own country, and send the clip to friends, family, and colleagues.

Friends of the Earth groups are running The Big Ask climate campaign in 17 European countries, so if you are in one of these countries, you can sign an online petition after you have watched the film.

Raise your voice, shout it on the train or in the middle of the street, stand on your desk at work: ACT THE F*CK NOW!!!

The time for talking is over, it's time for action!

Friends of the Earth Vlaanderen & Brussel

Comment Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use:
IRENA ???

This Swedish action is I believe not in accord with their signature under the IRENA Statute. You can find their signature here: http://www.irena.org/downloads/Foundconf/List%20of%20Signatory%20States.pdf
You can find the IRENA Statute here: http://www.irena.org/downloads/Founconf/
IRENA_FC_Statute_signed_in_Bonn_26_01_2009.pdf

I am having some serious doubts about some of IRENA's State parties intentions. They appear to embrace Nuclear Power as their main energy form.

For More evidence lets have a look at: European Parliament resolution of 3 February 2009 on the Second Strategic Energy Review (2008/2239(INI))

see paragraphs 86 - 92 on Nuclear Energy

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?
pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2009-0038+0+
DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN

Not very encouraging, is it !

IRENA (www.irena.org) is an agency to promote renewable energy forms and Nuclear Power is not !
(scroll down or click the link) Reason two = Nuclear Power is not a form of "green" energy and never will be

One question remains !
Is there may be something going wrong with IRENA ?

YES, THERE IS - IRENA may be in trouble thanks to nuclear industry in France with collusion by the United Arab Emirates

Energy & Environment

"So we have a choice to make. We can remain one of the world's leading importers of foreign oil, or we can make the investments that would allow us to become the world's leading exporter of renewable energy. We can let climate change continue to go unchecked, or we can help stop it. We can let the jobs of tomorrow be created abroad, or we can create those jobs right here in America and lay the foundation for lasting prosperity."

-President Obama, March 19, 2009

Progress

• The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act included more than $80 billion in clean energy investments that will jump-start our economy and build the clean energy jobs of tomorrow:
  

o $11 billion for a bigger, better, and smarter grid that will move renewable energy from the rural places it is produced to the cities where it is mostly used, as well as for 40 million smart meters to be deployed in American homes.
o $5 billion for low-income home weatherization projects.
o $4.5 billion to green federal buildings and cut our energy bill, saving taxpayers billions of dollars.
o $6.3 billion for state and local renewable energy and energy efficiency efforts.
o $600 million in green job training programs – $100 million to expand line worker training programs and $500 million for green workforce training.
o $2 billion in competitive grants to develop the next generation of batteries to store energy.

• Increasing, for the first time in more than a decade, the fuel economy standards for Model Year 2011 for cars and trucks so they will get better mileage, saving drivers money and spurring companies to develop more innovative products.
  
• The President issued a memorandum to the Department of Energy to implement more aggressive efficiency standards for common household appliances, like dishwashers and refrigerators. Through this step, over the next three decades, we´ll save twice the amount of energy produced by all the coal-fired power plants in America in any given year.
  
• Supporting the first steps of a legally-binding treaty to reduce mercury emissions worldwide.
  
• On Earth Day 2009, the President unveiled a program to develop the renewable energy projects on the waters of our Outer Continental Shelf that produce electricity from wind, wave, and ocean currents. These regulations will enable, for the first time ever, the nation to tap into our ocean´s vast sustainable resources to generate clean energy in an environmentally sound and safe manner.

Guiding Principles

President Obama does not accept a future in which the jobs and industries of tomorrow take root beyond our borders. It is time for the United States to lead again. Under President Obama, we will lead again, by developing an American clean energy industry, a 21st century economy that flourishes within our borders.

• Creating new Jobs in the Clean Energy Economy. Drive the development of new, green jobs that pay well and cannot be outsourced.
  
• Investing in the Next Generation of Energy Technologies. Invest $150 billion over ten years in energy research and development to transition to a clean energy economy.

Securing our Energy Future

Our reliance on oil poses a threat to our economic security. Over the last few decades, we have watched our economy rise and fall along with the price of a barrel of oil. We must commit ourselves to an economic future in which the strength of our economy is not tied to the unpredictability of oil markets. We must make the investments in clean energy sources that will curb our dependence on fossil fuels and make America energy independent.

• Breaking Dependence on Oil. Promote the next generation of cars and trucks and the fuels they run on.
  
• Producing More Energy at Home. Enhance U.S. energy supplies through responsible development of domestic renewable energy, fossil fuels, advanced biofuels and nuclear energy.
  
• Promoting Energy Efficiency. Promote investments in the transportation, electricity, industrial, building and agricultural sectors that reduce energy bills.

Closing the Carbon Loophole and Cracking Down on Polluters

We must take immediate action to reduce the carbon pollution that threatens our climate and sustains our dependence on fossil fuels. We have had limits in place on pollutants like sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and other harmful emissions for some time. After decades of inaction, we will finally close the carbon pollution loophole by limiting the amount of carbon polluters are allowed to pump into the atmosphere.

• Closing the Carbon Loophole. By stemming carbon pollution through a market-based cap, we can address in a systematic way all the energy challenges that we face: curbing our dependence on foreign oil, reducing our use of fossil fuels, and promoting new industries right here in America.
  
• Protecting American Consumers. Revenues generated by closing the carbon loophole will be returned to the people, especially vulnerable families, communities, and businesses.
  
• Promoting U.S. Competitiveness. Ensure a level playing field for domestic manufacturing and secure significant actions to combat climate change by our trading partners.

Comment Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use:
While in general I have warm feelings about President Barack Obama's Agenda on Energy And The Environment I do not like the following: February 03, 2010 2:41 PM EST Obama Announces Steps to Boost Biofuels, Clean Coal

I have with many others serious questions about the possibility of a Clean Coal Technology. What will you do with the CO2 captured is the main question in this discussion of course. That CO2 will come out of the burning of coal is an undeniable fact.

And although "The Nuclear Power Renaissance" is not found as a Global Warming fighting solution in the Agenda above I had hoped, with many others, that Nuclear Power would also be recognized as not green, too wasteful, too toxic, too dangerous, too expensive, not CO2 emission free and a dangerous Nuclear Weapon proliferation possibility.

And thus I had hoped that future dependance on Nuclear Power would also be regarded as a mistake and Nuclear Power would be seen as energy form that should be phased out.
You might want to click the following link, or just scroll down, to find out more on Nuclear Power:
Reason one - Why Nuclear Energy can never be a solution to Global Warming: Reason one = Nuclear Power powers Nuclear Weapons

Will the DOE in the US finally take the right turn ?
No UNFORTUNATELY still two-thirds of the budget of the DOE will be spend on the Nuclear Weapons Complex !

Why, one might ask, is this happening ?

Obama in his speech in Prague, April 5, 2009 said and I quote: "....So today, I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. (Applause.) I'm not naive. This goal will not be reached quickly -- perhaps not in my lifetime. It will take patience and persistence. But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change. We have to insist, "Yes, we can."...."

After those words I expected that the spending on the Nuclear Weapon Complex would become less. But instead there now is talk about a surge in Nuclear Weapon spending !!

To learn what is happening one might want to read:

And:

By Alexander Glaser, Zia Mian and Frank N. von Hippel

Editor's Note: On Jan. 18, diplomats from 65 countries at the U.N. Conference on Disarmament in Geneva will try to agree to begin talks on a treaty that would stop the production of plutonium and highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons. Cutting off production of fissile materials for weapons could provide the basis for irreversible reductions of all nuclear weapons.

In the article below, Alexander Glaser, Zia Mian and Frank von Hippel, all at Princeton University and affiliated with the International Panel on Fissile Materials, propose the basic pillars of a fissile material cutoff treaty, how compliance with such a treaty could be verified and who should pay the tab.

The Nuclear Industry and their lobbyist still want us to believe that Nuclear Power is safe.

But the man in the street nowadays knows that Nuclear Power IS connected to Nuclear Weapons.
One of the big issues when there is news about Iran's Nuclear Industry is the talk about Enrichment and the danger of the process - that the same machinery can also be used to make Weapon Grade Uranium.

Some will say - yes, but that is Iran.

While that maybe true, we should not forget that there is something which is called Vertical Proliferation and is used by Nuclear Weapon States to enlarge their Nuclear Weapon Arsenals, the only difference is that they do not use Uranium Enrichment to make Nuclear Weapons usable Fissile Material, but use Reprocessing of the Fuel Rods of a Power Plant to make Weapon Grade Plutonium, which is even more powerful.

Some of you might think - Oh, What the Hell.

To wake them up, here is what Nuclear Hell Looks Like...

Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use

Today our world is facing crises on an unprecedented scale - global warming, poverty, war, hunger, and disease. They threaten the very future of life as we know it, and on a daily basis bring death, sorrow and suffering to the majority of people on our planet. Yet these problems are almost entirely the results of human action and they can be equally be resolved by human action. We have an unprecedented opportunity to create the political will to manage the riches and natural bounty of our world in such a way as to meet the needs of all peoples, and to enable us to live together in peace and justice

Such is the desire of the overwhelming majority of peoples, yet we face a situation today where global military spending - money for killing - has now reached a total of $1.46 trillion in 2008. Furthermore, nine countries maintain arsenals of nuclear weapons - all together, over 23,000 warheads. These uniquely destructive weapons can not only destroy life on our planet many times over, but they are also used as political weapons of terror, reinforcing an unjustifiable global inequality. The eradication of these weapons will not only end the threat of global annihilation and this hierarchy of terror, but it will unlock enormous resources to address climate change and mass poverty, serve as the leading edge of the global trend towards demilitarisation, and make advances in other areas of human aspiration possible.

In spite of treaty obligations and international resolutions and rulings over the decades since the criminal atomic bombings of Japan by the United States in 1945, the nuclear weapons states have failed to eliminate their nuclear arms. Their continued possession of these weapons, together with modernisation of systems and increasingly aggressive nuclear use policies in recent years, have contributed to an increasing tendency towards their proliferation - and a greater likelihood of nuclear war.

The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) requires both non-proliferation and disarmament, and must be supported and strengthened - yet it lacks a concrete process for achieving these essential goals. Furthermore, there are grave problems with its Article IV. This guarantees the right to peaceful nuclear energy but overlooks the inextricable link between nuclear power and weapons technologies and their health and environmental costs.

The newly-launched International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) provides an opportunity to phase out nuclear power, superseding the Article IV guarantee. This said, the NPT continues to provide the framework for advancing towards an essential new initiative - a timetable for the elimination of nuclear weapons so urgently sought by the global majority.

The NPT Review Conference in May 2010 presents a precious opportunity to take that initiative. It is an opportunity that must on no account be missed. After the spiralling aggression of the Bush era, the Obama presidency provides a new context for our campaigning. President Obama's commitment - alongside that of President Medvedev of Russia - to global abolition of nuclear weapons is greatly welcomed, and their first steps towards bilateral reductions and support for treaties restricting nuclear developments are positive. However, the goal of global abolition cannot be postponed into the indefinite future, for only a defined, achievable and timetabled process can halt the proliferation that threatens us all.

To this end, to secure a future for humanity and our planet, to help create the conditions for a world of peace, justice and genuine human security, we urge the 2010 NPT Review Conference to make an unambiguous commitment to begin negotiations on a convention for the time-bound elimination of all nuclear weapons - a Nuclear Weapons Convention.

Such a step will not happen without the active encouragement of civil society, giving voice to the yearning of the global majority for a world free from the fear of nuclear annihilation. We urge all those who share this vision to join us in mobilising for the international peace conference in New York on May 1st and the International Day of Action for a Nuclear Free World, in New York and globally, on May 2nd, as well as for the presentation of petition signatures to the NPT Review Conference.

Initial Signatories (Cambridge/Berlin, 29th of September 2009):

International Organizations
Abolition 2000 Global Council
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Europe
International Association of Peace Messenger Cities
International Network of Engineers and Scientists for Global Responsibility
International Peace Bureau
Pax Christi International
Women's International League for Peace and Freedom

National Organizations
American Friends Service Committee, USA
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, UK
Deutsche Friedensgesellschaft - Vereinigte KriegsdienstgegnerInnen, Germany
Emil Touma Institute for Palestinian and Israeli Studies, Israel
Gensuikyo, Japan
International Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms, German Section
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, German Section
Mouvement de la Paix, France
Naturwissenschaftlerinitiative Verantwortung für Frieden und Zukunftsfähigkeit, Germany
Nuclear Age Peace Foundation, USA
Peace Action, USA
Peace Women Partners Asia-Pacific, Philippines
STOP the War Coalition, Philippine Section
Swedish Peace Committee, Sweden
Swedish Peace Council, Sweden
The Coalition for a ME Free of Nuclear Weapons, Israel
United for Peace and Justice, USA

U.S. Peace Council, USA
Vredesactie - Bomspotting, Belgium
Western States Legal Foundation, USA

To sign onto the call, please send an E-mail to npt@ialana.de.

UNITED FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE
www.unitedforpeace.org | 212-868-5545
PO Box 607; Times Square Station; New York, NY 10108

We are told that nuclear power is about to achieve a "green renaissance," "clean coal" is just around the corner, and municipal garbage is a "renewable resource," which, when burned, will yield "sustainable energy." On the other hand, sometimes we are told that solar, geothermal and tidal power are what we really need to "green" our energy system.

How is a person to make sense of all these competing claims?

Luckily, scientists have developed two sets of criteria that we can use to judge the "greenness" of competing technologies. The first is called "The 12 principles of green engineering" and the second is "The 12 principles of green chemistry."...

...On the face of it, applying a "green principles" test to nuclear power would force us to conclude that it fails by any objective standard and that we should be looking elsewhere for green energy...

Peter Montague in Rachel's Democracy & Health News #983, October 30, 2008

Apart from not being green. Uranium mining and Nuclear Power Generation are both very serious health risks factors. Your are adviced to read:

The Nuclear Waste problem should also be part of this discussion, I think:

On the same issue:

Over the last few years the nuclear industry has used concerns about climate change to argue for a nuclear revival. Although industry representatives may have convinced some political leaders that this is a good idea, there is little evidence of private capital investing in nuclear plants in competitive electricity markets. The reason is simple: nuclear power is uneconomical.

In an excellent recent analysis, "The Nuclear Illusion," Amory B. Lovins and Imran Sheikh put the cost of electricity from a new nuclear power plant at 14¢ per kilowatt hour and that from a wind farm at 7¢ per kilowatt hour. This comparison includes the costs of fuel, capital, operations and maintenance, and transmission and distribution. It does not include the additional costs for nuclear of disposing of waste, insuring plants against an accident, and decommissioning the plants when they wear out. Given this huge gap, the so-called nuclear revival can succeed only by unloading these costs onto taxpayers. If all the costs of generating nuclear electricity are included in the price to consumers, nuclear power is dead in the water.

Lester R. Brown in his article: The flawed economics of nuclear power

I think the Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy's webpage full with YouTube videos on the above mentioned issue is not only of use in the US, but also in Europe and the rest of the World.

Let us citizens of this World tell our Governments we want Nuclear Abolition and a greener planet worked on starting this minute. There is no time to loose if we want to be safe from as well the Nuclear Weapon Threat including the climate effect of a Nuclear War as the Global Warming threat to us all and our planet. The money no longer used to build Nuclear Weapons and keeping the Nuclear Weapons deployed and ready could be divested from the Military Industrial Complex and invested in greening the planet, creating jobs, health care etc.

Let us call for Nuclear Weapons Convention negotiating starting tomorrow and Nuclear Weapons Abolition preferably before 2010 or at least before 2020...
And let us call to protect the planet with a sustainable way of life starting now !

There is no time to loose !!!

Ak Malten
Pro Peaceful Energy Use

Thanks to French botanist Patrick Blanc, Plant Walls - vertical gardens attached to hotels and museums - are sprouting up in cities worldwide...

...Blanc's brainchild, called Le Mur Végétal, or Plant Wall, is a dense sheet of vegetation that can grow against any surface, or even in midair. It works by doing away entirely with dirt, instead growing plants hydroponically in felt pockets attached to a rigid plastic backing. First exhibited in 1994 at the International Garden Festival in Chaumont-sur-Loire, France, the Plant Wall immediately caught the public's attention...

Amber Haq at businessweek

A Columbia professor believes that converting skyscrapers into crop farms could help reduce global warming and make New York cleaner. It's a vision straight out of Futurama—but here's how it might work.

Urban farming has always been a slightly quixotic endeavor. From the small animal farm that was perched on the roof of the Upper West Side's Ansonia apartment building in the early 1900s (fresh eggs delivered by bellhop!) to community gardens threatened by real-estate development, the dream of preserving a little of the country in the city is a utopian one. But nobody has ever dreamed as big as Dr. Dickson Despommier, a professor of environmental sciences and microbiology at Columbia University, who believes that "vertical farm" skyscrapers could help fight global warming.

Imagine a cluster of 30-story towers on Governors Island or in Hudson Yards producing fruit, vegetables, and grains while also generating clean energy and purifying wastewater. Roughly 150 such buildings, Despommier estimates, could feed the entire city of New York for a year. Using current green building systems, a vertical farm could be self-sustaining and even produce a net output of clean water and energy.

Lisa Chamberlain, New York Magazine

Comment Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use:
Although it is presented in a not so glossy fashion, this site will give you a lot of information on how to save energy in your house.

This information is especially useful when building a house of your own or are searching for a house already on the market, but you want it to mach your saving energy idea.

This information is not to be missed for your comfort, your energy bill savings and at the same time helping or environment by lowering your CO2 footprint...

According to the Department of Energy, in 2001 the world consumed at an average rate of more than 13 trillion watts ( 13 terawatts, TW), just a fraction of the 120,000 TW of energy available that falls to Earth - free.
Life on Earth long ago realized that the sun was the best way to get free energy, just look around at all that green stuff growing outside.

Today, solar energy accounts for only 0.1% of our energy portfolio.

We will likely look back at the use of fossil fuels as an obvious misstep in technology development. A small blip on the radar of human technology, like a toddler testing the boundaries of what is possible.

Gerry Wolff, coordinator of TREC-UK

Solyndra, a start-up making thin-film photovoltaic systems, has secured $600 million in funding.

It's additionally secured $1.2 billion in contracts from clients in the U.S. and Europe, the Fremont, Calif.-based company revealed Tuesday.

What start-up gets that kind of funding and client promise? Basically, one that's invented thin-film solar panels shaped like old-school fluorescent lightbulbs.

Since 2005, Solyndra has quietly been developing a proprietary CIGS-based thin film photovoltaic (PV) system and a staff of more than 500 employees.

CIGS is a material that includes a combination of copper, indium, gallium, and selenide. It's now being used by quite a number of companies to make thin-film solar cells among other things.

Solyndra's cylindrical PV panels don't have to be spaced to leave room for rotation toward the sun as with flat solar panels. The panels are actually rows of cylindrical tubes which are installed horizontally and close to one another.

The tubes can "capture sunlight across a 360-degree photovoltaic surface capable of converting direct, diffuse, and reflected sunlight into electricity," according to Solyndra.

Candace Lombardi at Green Tech - CNET News

It's not every day that you run across an entirely new strain of life, which is exactly what Dutch kinetic sculptor Theo Jansen has created.

His Strandbeests are wondrous wind-powered automatons that exhibit an incredibly lifelike dexterity as they cascade in flowing waves down seaside sands. The elegantly articulated creatures are constructed using genetic algorithms and are constantly evolving to better suit their environment.

Mike Chino at inhabitat

In the desert the main problem for a human is to find and / or to make drinkable water. But with the use of Concentrated Solar Power CSP and Solar Power SP techniques this could be a thing of the past. The same is equally valid for Solar Cooking, which makes sense in the desert, without plenty of firewood to use.

In the tropics these techniques are also useful, while it saves time and wood to build a fire for cooking and to purify dirty water. It can be done with CSP and SP techniques

Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use

Finally, there’s a solution as big as our problems: a bold plan to Repower America with 100% clean electricity within 10 years.

First described in a speech in July by Al Gore, Repower America means new industries with high-paying jobs. It means lower energy costs. It means replacing coal and foreign oil with clean domestic sources. It is a vital step toward protecting the environment and solving the climate crisis.
How do we do it?

Invest in three core areas – efficiency, generation and transmission.

• Energy Efficiency: A national upgrade to eliminate waste, save money, and improve comfort. Make every bit of energy we produce work harder for us.
• Renewable Generation: Accelerate the ramp-up of clean, renewable electricity sources through policies that support increased private and public investment in technologies that work, like wind, solar, and geothermal.
• National Unified Smart Grid: Modernize transmission infrastructure so that clean electricity generated anywhere in America can power homes and businesses across the nation; Build national electricity 'interstates' that move power quickly and cheaply to where it is needed; Establish local smart grids that buy and sell power from households and support clean plug-in cars.

Throughout history, students have been the driving force in social change. Now more than ever is the time for students across the country to become global warming activists and join the movement.

On this page you will find tips for stopping global warming that your class or school can do today. You don't have to do everything, but we all need to do something! Get started in your school and keep us posted with results.

www.stopglobalwarming.org

Ah, I hear roof top gardens, a good and nice example to isolate your roof in a beautiful way !     But that is not what I head in mind....

Adobe walls !... An other very beautiful and effective isolation, which could also be helpful

The ultimate answer would be to start living underground....

No way, I am not a mole, I want fresh air to breath ! And you could have it, plenty

Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use

    Comment Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use:

    Not bad for starters ! Let us hear it ! Hooray for the UK !

To make the biofuel one used crops of agrarian products, like maize and sugar cane, which are normally eaten to make a relative very little amount of biofuel out of it.

The consequences were that great fields of farm land were necessary and used to grow monoculture crops for the production of biofuel instead of food. It produced a very little amount of biofuel in the form of ethanol or biodiesel, compared to its potential for the production of food. So it was a waste of farmland, but it was done because the crops produced would bring in more cash, if it was sold to produce fuel, then it would if it was sold as food.

Then after a while local people started protests because the prices of food, like grain and maize were becoming so high, that people could almost not or not buy them to make food or buy the food in the form of bread

"Solar power has always been a limited, far-off solution. Now we can seriously think about solar power as unlimited and soon." -- Daniel Nocera; Science; July 31, 2008

A funny, highly educational video telling the "story of stuff" in easy understandable language.

Ak Malten, Pro Peaceful Energy Use