Politics, Re-Spun

Journalistic objectivity is a myth…de-spinning the political and re-spinning it for social, economic and political justice.

Archive for the ‘Technology’ Category

Who Pulls John McCain’s Strings?

Posted by Stephen Elliott-Buckley on June 20, 2008

My Commentary is in fire engine red!

McCain Plans to Almost Double U.S. Nuclear Reactors

Lorraine Woellert Thu Jun 19, 9:23 AM ET

June 19 (Bloomberg) — Republican presidential candidate John McCain will push to almost double the number of nuclear reactors in the U.S. as part of a broad plan to address the nation’s energy woes.

OK, #1 appears to be the nucular lobby, assuming they still pronounce it that way now that w.Caesar is a lame duck.

On the second day of a two-week tour to promote his energy security proposal, McCain told an audience in Springfield, Missouri, yesterday that he would increase research in so-called clean-coal technology and push to add 100 new nuclear reactors, almost double the 104 nuclear plants now in use.

And #2 seems to be McCain having swallowed the clean-coal Kool-Aid.

“I will set this nation on a course to building 45 new reactors by the year 2030, with the ultimate goal of 100 new plants to power the homes and factories and cities of America,” McCain said. “This task will be as difficult as it is necessary. We will need to recover all the knowledge and skills that have been lost over three stagnant decades in a highly technical field.”

McCain’s remarks build on a speech in Houston on June 17 in which he laid out the elements of his energy plan. Central to that plan is expansion of offshore drilling for oil and natural gas, a proposal that is under fire from his Democratic rival, Illinois Senator Barack Obama, and environmental groups.

And strike 3 would be big oil [is there small oil anymore?]

“One obstacle to expanding our nuclear-powered electricity is the mindset of those who prefer to buy time and hope that our energy problems will somehow solve themselves,” McCain said, noting that Obama’s home state of Illinois has more nuclear reactors than any other.

Oh yes, and Obama is personally responsible for all the nukes in Illinois. Right.

Clean-Burning Coal

McCain, an Arizona senator, also vowed to spend $2 billion on research into clean-burning coal.

“This single achievement will open vast amounts of our oldest and most abundant resource,” McCain, 71, said. “It will deliver not only electricity but jobs to some of the areas hardest hit by our economic troubles.”

And GHGs that I don’t want to even begin to calculate.

McCain’s energy plan also includes spending on renewable resources such as wind and solar power.

Right. Probably not to the tune of $2b that clean coal will get.

McCain was joined at the forum by Michael Chesser, chairman and CEO of Kansas City, Missouri-based Great Plains Energy, and Greg Boyce, chairman and CEO of St. Louis-based Peabody Coal, the largest U.S. coal producer, who said a patchwork of state and federal regulations are hampering their ability to build new power generators.

“We need to have a regulatory compact in place,” Chesser said. “There are definitely things you could do as president to facilitate that environment.”

McCain also touted his environmental bona fides at a fundraiser in Chicago last night. In a 10-minute film preceding his appearance at the Drake Hotel, McCain made an appeal to outdoorsmen.

“Our ability to hunt and fish and enjoy the great national treasures of America is something I’d like to preserve,” McCain said in the film. “I’m committed to preserving the enjoyment of the great national treasures of the most beautiful nation in the world.”

Why is he talking about Canada now? :)

Posted in Corporations, Ecology, Economics, Environment, Morality, Natural Resources, Neoliberal Economics, Technology | 3 Comments »

The End of Globalization–Can You Smell it Yet?

Posted by Stephen Elliott-Buckley on May 28, 2008

A few years ago I was sitting in the pub at Simon Fraser University with the usual suspects…a gang of mostly political science graduate and undergraduate students for our weekly 4-hour lunch consisting of political debate and movie reviews.

I can’t remember the details but I had just been learning about peak oil. Petrochemicals have a large role in the fertilizers that enable the population of the industrialized [OECD, minority] world to eat food to the degree that supports our massive population. Apparently there was something in Harpers about that some time ago. I’m still scared to read it.

And since most of us at the lunch were generally political economists, we often discussed how to derail the global trade regime: IMF/WB/WTO. Since Hugo Chavez has spayed and neutered the IMF by paying off most of Latin America’s loans to it and since the WTO Doha “Development” (sic) round of negotiations has stalled leading to neoliberal defections toward regional trade initiatives, the regime may be collapsing on its own, thank you very much.

But one thing came up that day at lunch when I was trying to address how to cripple neoliberal globalization, and that was how peak oil will make prohibitive the costs of transporting materials around the world to be processed by workers in jobs outsourced from the industrialized world into products shipped to us in containers on those big boats. The economics of it all depends on a price of oil that is not quite so high as today’s $135/barrel. Or not even so high as the $70 barrel 2 years ago [yes, the cost of a barrel of oil has doubled in the last 24 months].

When peak oil grabs us by the throat and prices rise, the global supply chain will become less cost effective. Our runners and bananas will begin to have costs that assert them as the luxuries they really are. Economics will become more local, both in food from bioregions, but also products and services.

One friend at lunch that day said they’d just find another way to power the big boats. Nuclear power perhaps. Or maybe clean (sic) coal. Ok, he didn’t mention clean coal, but both it and atomic manipulation are somewhat impractical for varying reasons.

So we’re left with the end of globalization that comes not from policy decisions based on educating the populace to demand our representatives (sic) alter the global trade regime. It comes from the end of cheap fossil fuels.

My friend’s nuclear answer sounded plausible, but I had a hard time being truly swayed by its possibility.

So yesterday I read at Report on Business [see below] that I was on the right track.

And while the piece mentions that NAFTA could encourage outsourcing to Mexico instead of Asia, and by implication that a fully mercantilist, protectionist Canada may not be imminent, our latest globalization prime minister did recently scuttle a deal to sell off MDA’s Radarsat to an American firm. In the end, realists are realists.

And while we may not all be ready to go out and buy our yurts and embrace a bioregional lifestyle outside of metropolitan centres, we are one step closer. And if oil hits $200/barrel this Christmas, we’ll have to re-assess the situation with a little more intensity.

Oil’s cargo cushion

The soaring cost of fuel is whittling away at the cheap-labour advantage enjoyed by Asian exporters, giving Canadian firms a welcome edge in their fight to win back business from Asian competitors.

Two bank economists argue in a report released Tuesday that because of higher fuel costs, shipping a standard 40-foot container from Shanghai to the east coast of North America now costs $8,000 (U.S.), up from $3,000 in 2000 when oil was just $20 a barrel.

That higher cost is passed on to North American consumers, making goods from China and other Asian places more costly compared to the offerings of domestic North American producers.

Some Canadian manufacturers are already noticing the effect.

“It’s helped us because it’s harder for the Asians and others to ship over here,” said Barry Zekelman, chief executive officer of Atlas Tube Inc. of Harrow, Ont.

He said that after taking 30 to 40 per cent of the North American market for some steel tubing products, the Chinese have now “virtually disappeared” – partly, though not exclusively, because of the costs of transporting a heavy product such as steel across the Pacific.

Jeffrey Rubin and Benjamin Tal of CIBC World Markets Inc. say higher oil prices are reversing the world-is-flat effect, in which lower trade barriers and new technologies like the Internet made it cheaper to move goods and services from developing Asia to the markets of the rich world.

“In a world of triple-digit oil prices, distance costs money,” they write. “And while trade liberalization and technology may have flattened the world, rising transport prices will once again make it rounder.”

Mr. Rubin and Mr. Tal say the steel sector is a prime example of the world-is-round effect.

Chinese steel exports to the United States are falling by more than 20 per cent year over year. China’s costs have risen because Chinese producers have to bring in their iron ore from faraway places such as Australia and Brazil, then ship the finished steel to the United States. As a result, U.S. steel producers actually have an advantage over Chinese rivals.

“Rising transport costs have already more than offset China’s otherwise slim cost advantage, giving U.S. steel a competitive advantage in its own market for the first time in over a decade,” the economists write.

They say higher transport costs are affecting other “freight-intensive” sectors such as furniture and industrial machinery, too. These goods now account for 42 per cent of total Chinese exports to the United States, down from 52 per cent in 2004.

In fact, if oil prices had not risen so quickly and transport costs had not soared so dramatically, growth in Chinese exports since 2004 would have been 30 per cent stronger than the actual figure.

Of course, the rising cost of goods from China is hardly happy news for many Canadian companies that source parts from Chinese factories, sell imported goods from China or have their products assembled by Chinese workers.

They suggest that “instead of finding cheap labour half way around the world, the key will be to find the cheapest labour force within reasonable shipping distance of your market.”

While Canadian companies could benefit, the bigger winner will be Mexico, they say. “Look for Mexico’s maquiladora plants to get another chance at bat when it comes to supplying the North American market,” they write.

Shipping costs to and from Asia have risen so much that they have eclipsed tariffs as a barrier to global trade, Mr. Rubin and Mr. Tal say, calling the cost of moving goods “the largest barrier to global trade today.”

“In fact,” they say, “in tariff-equivalent terms, the explosion in global transport costs has effectively offset all the trade liberalization efforts of the last three decades.”

When oil was $20 a barrel, transport costs were equivalent to a 3-per-cent tariff rate; now it’s above 9 per cent.

Aggravating the problem is the fact that modern new container ships travel faster than old bulk carriers and so use up more fuel, doubling fuel consumption per unit of freight over the past 15 years.

“This is an environment in which shipping from the Pacific Rim may not make sense any more,” Mr. Tal said in an interview.

“If you’re thinking, ‘maybe we should bring in a container from China,’ you should think again.”

Posted in Bioregions, Canada, Colonialism, Community, Corporations, Ecology, Economics, Natural Resources, Neoliberal Economics, Society, Technology, Venezuela, Work | 2 Comments »

Gordon’s New Hoax: Informed Climate Change Policy

Posted by Stephen Elliott-Buckley on January 26, 2008

Hot on the heals of Steve in Ottawa, Gordon in Victoria is trying to look like he knows what he is talking about with the climate change thing.

Embracing the Gateway Project goals that link in with the North American SuperCorridor, worshiping the car and pretending to care about transit while removing democracy from the TransLink board are pretty cynical.

But worse is Gordon’s idiocy when he was being interviewed by Vaughn Palmer on theVoice of BC TV program last fall almost bragging about how he just made up a target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions without any real scientific backing. He should have at least read George Monbiot’s Heat. Here is how Palmer described it in his column on January 16, 2008:

It has been almost a year since the throne speech announced the premier’s goal of reducing greenhouse gases by one-third.

Where did he get the target? I asked him a while back.

“I don’t want to pretend that I went out and asked a scientific panel about how to get there,” Campbell replied. “I didn’t.”

Rather he picked the target out of the air, then set his officials the task of determining the means and cost of hitting it.

It’s clear that window dressing is important as Gordon traipses around the left half of the continent signing non-binding memoranda of understanding with various other jurisdictions on fixing the climate change problem…while twinning our bridges and building more roads.

But today, when my email Inbox received Steve’s crazy treaty ratification nonsense, I received Gordon’s announcement [and below] that he’s going to actually try to come up with some science from a new wonderful scientific panel to back up his desire to be the green premier with the brand new Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions.

Not trusting the fellow at all, I watched his government flip from promoting racist policy towards First Nations with a treaty referendum which facilitated open discrimination, to one that uses treaties to skim land from the Agricultural Land Reserve. Now our leader is trying to come up with some semblance of expert backing for his whimsical climate change solutions.

Despite not trusting the premier, I expect that there is a chance that this Institute can actually come up with some real contributions to the issue. I worry, though, that its creation–being significantly political and optical–may confine its work to solutions that will allow the climate change deniers and avoiders, as well as the rich and SUV-lovers to keep driving on our smoothly paved, privatized toll roads and bridges.

And in the end, the first sentence of the announcement just made my stomach spin. The province will seek legislative approval for the Institute. It’s almost as if folks in Victoria and Ottawa co-ordinated their press releases to capitalize on the idea that legislative oversight actually matters. BC signed a new corporate bill of rights combined with a de facto economic union with Alberta in TILMA after secret negotiations and won’t allow the agreement to be ratified in the ledge. BC has removed democratic accountability from TransLink, but they are promoting how important it is to get legislative approval for building this Institute.

It’s just too much to bear in one day.

And to rub in the gall is the constant reference to the role of the private sector in the Institute. P3s are so sexy these days for neoliberals. Governments, academics and the private sector: nice. What of labour, NGOs, environmental groups, the rest of civil society? No need. In the privatized commons view of Gordon’s neoliberalism, the business sector is sufficient.

And quite frankly, I don’t want the private sector to have anything to do with the kind of socio-behavioural change required in our society to avert climate change disaster.

Premier’s Office PREM:EX wrote:

January 25, 2008
B.C. to Fund World-Leading Climate Research

Vancouver – The Province will seek legislative approval for $94.5 million to create the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, which will bring together top scientists, researchers, governments and the private sector to develop innovative climate change adaptation and mitigation solutions, Premier Gordon Campbell announced today.

“British Columbia universities have some of the top climate scientists and researchers in the world,” said Campbell. “This institute will bring together those academics, along with others from around the world, with business and the private sector to develop new policy alternatives, to find ways to educate and encourage greener lifestyles, and to develop new, green technologies into products that can be used by consumers around the globe.”

The Institute will be a unique joint collaboration between the province’s four research-intensive universities – the University of Victoria, University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University and University of Northern British Columbia – the private sector and government. It will bring provincial, national and international climate researchers together to work with governments and the private sector to develop ideas that can be applied and transferred to government, industry and the public.

Besides providing research support and developing innovative alternatives such as new energy systems, new forms of transportation, alternative technologies, and socio-behavioral change, the Institute will also provide the public with information and ideas on how to reduce individual greenhouse gas emissions through public forums, publications and online information. It will provide education, training and outreach to business leaders, government staff and non-government organizations via workshops, short courses and publications.

The Institute will be founded on four pillars: Research on climate change impacts; assessment of mitigation and adaptation options, including technology development; education and capacity building; and outreach through knowledge management and technology transfer.

The Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions will be hosted and the collaboration led by the University of Victoria, utilizing existing space. The proposed funding will be used to support research projects, staff salaries, graduate fellowships and internships. The endowment will ensure the Institute will operate in perpetuity.

“Linking British Columbia’s climate researchers together and with other national and international researchers will help us develop and apply knowledge to British Columbia situations,” said University of Victoria president David Turpin. “It will also ensure that research is meaningfully transferred to government, industry and the public and secure B.C.’s leadership in this important area.”

“Developing technologies to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions represents not only a challenge, but an economic opportunity,” said Environment Minister Barry Penner. “We have at least 18,000 people working on leading-edge technological solutions in B.C., which we can market to the world.”

Advanced Education Minister Murray Coell said the Institute will build on existing climate research initiatives currently operating in B.C., such as the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium.

“This will serve as a linchpin for a Pacific regional network that includes key scholars from B.C.’s four research-intensive universities, major Alberta universities, and universities from Washington, California and others,” said Coell. “The Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions will be a valuable resource to government and the private sector by providing access to the considerable climate change expertise found in British Columbia’s universities.”

The Institute will be governed by a consortium of British Columbia’s four research universities and will receive advice and guidance from an advisory board made up of public and private sector stakeholders.

The Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions’ mission will be: ‘To partner with governments, the private sector, other researchers and civil society, in order to undertake research on, monitor, and assess the potential impacts of climate change and to assess, develop and promote viable mitigation and adaptation options to better inform climate change policies and actions.’

The Institute will stimulate and promote the development and commercialization of world-leading climate change solutions and assist government and the private sector in selecting the best possible solutions to be applied to mitigation and adaptation. It will support and promote societal change and use the synergies of a broad collaboration to leverage funding coming into the province. The Institute will also be a key partner in providing education and training opportunities for graduate students, both in British Columbia and globally.

British Columbia is legally mandated to reduce B.C. greenhouse gases by 33 per cent below 2007 levels by 2020; reduce emissions by at least 80 per cent below 2007 levels by 2050; and make all provincial government operations carbon-neutral by 2010.

Link to More Information:

Related Video:

$14-Billion Transit Plan for British Columbia

Posted in Bioregions, British Columbia, Ecology, Economics, Environment, First Nations, Neoliberal Economics, Privatization, Racism, Technology, Transit | Leave a Comment »

The Media Eats Us Alive–And We Pass it the Salt

Posted by Stephen Elliott-Buckley on November 28, 2007

The CRTC in Canada and the FCC in the USA are not designed to ensure the media plays its role as a free press educating citizens of the issues required for us all to be active participants in healthy functioning democracies.

Those organizations are regulatory bodies designed to toss in a few show trial constraints on the feeding frenzy that is corporate concentrated media. But for the most part, they are consolidation lubrication.

If you aren’t completely convinced of the reality of concentration in media ownership browse through these:

Bill Moyers presents an FCC-hate in. The best line: “You ought to be ashamed of yourself for not respecting the democracy you live in.” The sad truth, is that as North America slides into a closed, un-free, soft-gliding-to-hard-fascist state [have you read Naomi Wolf's new book yet?], democracy is actually a threat to global corporate imperialism. Government protection of the right to a free press is an impediment to be exorcised from the sick body politic. Democracy is being damned.

And some thoughts on the beginning of a media war…it’s about bloody time.

Posted in Activism, Canada, Class War, Corporations, Culture, Democracy, Economics, Education, Journalism, Media, Neoliberal Economics, Society, Soft Fascism, Technology, USA | Leave a Comment »

The Nexus Between Garbage Media and Climate Change

Posted by Stephen Elliott-Buckley on July 11, 2007

Rupert Murdoch, a ghoul of corporate concentrated media ownership, is appearing to be moved by criticisms that Fox Network is irrational and damaging to society, particularly on their flat earth approach to global warming opposition.

Brave New World Films has produced a 2.5 minute piece [above] in their ongoing campaign against the rationality-challenged, sensationalist Fox Network.

It is combined with a campaign to encourage green-positioned Home Depot to stop advertising with Fox. More information is at Brave New World Films’ Fox Attacks site.

And if you have never seen the movie Network, or if it has been more than a few years, you truly owe it to yourself to see how this 1976 film predicted the irrational soup of media today that currently shackles the role of an intelligent, free press in a representative democracy.

Posted in Activism, Community, Corporations, Democracy, Ecology, Environment, Media, Society, Technology | Leave a Comment »