A mere eight years after it was introduced to farmers, Bt corn is now susceptible to a certain strain of rootworm:
http://news.yahoo.com/bugs-may-resistant-genetically-modified-corn-213322828.html
Friday, December 30, 2011
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Thursday, March 31, 2011
What Does Philosophy Have to do with the Power Grid?
A common thought in our culture is that philosophy is just people's opinions, and that one person's opinion is as good as any other's. It doesn't really matter what you believe, as long as you're sincere about it. After all, philosophy isn't relevant to the really important things in life, right? Here's one stark example of why this view is mistaken:
I just finished watching a History Channel documentary called "The Crumbling of America." The documentary highlights numerous problems with our country's infrastructure, including dams, aqueducts, the power grid, and bridges. Among other things, they predict that there is a 66% chance that in the next 30 years, a large earthquake will bring down the levees of the Sacramento River delta. A catastrophe of this sort would reduce California's water supply by upwards of 50%. So, there is a 66% chance that in the next 30 years California will suddenly and catastrophically lose 50% of its water supply, along with the devastation that such a massive flood would bring.
Now, I wouldn't make the claim in all cases, but in the case of (at least) the power grid and other utility-owned infrastructure, I think that the sorry state of things can be traced in part to the philosophical view that businesses are primarily responsible to their shareholders (i.e., those who own stock in the company), not their stakeholders (i.e., those who have some interest in seeing the company succeed, such as their customers, their suppliers, their employees, and so forth). Major infrastructure projects take millions, if not billions or in some cases (e.g., the Sacramento levees), trillions of dollars to carry out. A utility company looking to maximize its profits is going to want to avoid paying for such projects. Further, if a major disaster took out much of the country's infrastructure, either the government (i.e., you and I) or the company's insurance agency would likely be footing much of the bill for the reconstruction project. So, there is a perverse incentive for companies to avoid building new infrastructure or updating old infrastructure if they don't absolutely have to. As long as the current infrastructure is good enough, they'll keep it. If a major disaster happens that takes out the infrastructure, someone else will help pay for it. Either way, it's a win-win for them and a lose-lose for the rest of us.
Who says ideas don't matter?
I just finished watching a History Channel documentary called "The Crumbling of America." The documentary highlights numerous problems with our country's infrastructure, including dams, aqueducts, the power grid, and bridges. Among other things, they predict that there is a 66% chance that in the next 30 years, a large earthquake will bring down the levees of the Sacramento River delta. A catastrophe of this sort would reduce California's water supply by upwards of 50%. So, there is a 66% chance that in the next 30 years California will suddenly and catastrophically lose 50% of its water supply, along with the devastation that such a massive flood would bring.
Now, I wouldn't make the claim in all cases, but in the case of (at least) the power grid and other utility-owned infrastructure, I think that the sorry state of things can be traced in part to the philosophical view that businesses are primarily responsible to their shareholders (i.e., those who own stock in the company), not their stakeholders (i.e., those who have some interest in seeing the company succeed, such as their customers, their suppliers, their employees, and so forth). Major infrastructure projects take millions, if not billions or in some cases (e.g., the Sacramento levees), trillions of dollars to carry out. A utility company looking to maximize its profits is going to want to avoid paying for such projects. Further, if a major disaster took out much of the country's infrastructure, either the government (i.e., you and I) or the company's insurance agency would likely be footing much of the bill for the reconstruction project. So, there is a perverse incentive for companies to avoid building new infrastructure or updating old infrastructure if they don't absolutely have to. As long as the current infrastructure is good enough, they'll keep it. If a major disaster happens that takes out the infrastructure, someone else will help pay for it. Either way, it's a win-win for them and a lose-lose for the rest of us.
Who says ideas don't matter?
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Earthship Green Building Seminar
Earthship Green Building Seminar
2011 Seminar Schedule
2011 Seminar Schedule
April 29-May 1
July 29-31
Sept 30-Oct 2
#2 Earthship Way, Taos, NM
To reserve your seminar spot, emailkirsten@earthship.com or call 575-751-0462
To reserve your seminar spot, emailkirsten@earthship.com or call 575-751-0462
Monday, March 28, 2011
Seedlings
My pepper and basil seedlings are just starting to come up in their heated seed starter trays. They look so small and fragile under the pale glow of the shop lights. I've been growing pretty much everything from seed for the past couple years now and I've had a fair amount of success with doing so, but at this stage it still seems like there's no way they're going to get big enough to survive outdoors.
Life is fragile. Life is a gift.
Life is fragile. Life is a gift.
Asian Carp Problem = Fish Emulsion Fertilizer Opportunity
For years, Asian Carp have inexorably migrated up the Illinois River from the South. Now, they are on the doorstep of Lake Michigan. NPR ran a story on it here, and CBS has a video about it on YouTube here.
If they reach Lake Michigan, the results will likely be disastrous for the region. Various plans for stopping the carp have been tried, from electric barriers to mass poisoning of the river.
Personally, I'd like to see more companies fish Asian Carp out of the river to produce fish emulsion fertilizer. It is already being done by one company. Why not make this an all-out effort to get rid of the carp and enrich our gardens in the process?
Similarly, in 2010 Pat Quinn announced that the carp would be shipped to China, where they are considered a delicacy. I hope more people get on this and start exporting more of the fish to China. We could use a better balance of trade between the two nations.
If they reach Lake Michigan, the results will likely be disastrous for the region. Various plans for stopping the carp have been tried, from electric barriers to mass poisoning of the river.
Personally, I'd like to see more companies fish Asian Carp out of the river to produce fish emulsion fertilizer. It is already being done by one company. Why not make this an all-out effort to get rid of the carp and enrich our gardens in the process?
Similarly, in 2010 Pat Quinn announced that the carp would be shipped to China, where they are considered a delicacy. I hope more people get on this and start exporting more of the fish to China. We could use a better balance of trade between the two nations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)