Tuesday, February 24, 2009

How the Crash Will Reshape America - The Atlantic (March 2009

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200903/meltdown-geography
Richard Florida's latest thoughts.

The crash of 2008 continues to reverberate loudly nationwide—destroying jobs, bankrupting businesses, and displacing homeowners. But already, it has damaged some places much more severely than others. On the other side of the crisis, America’s economic landscape will look very different than it does today. What fate will the coming years hold for New York, Charlotte, Detroit, Las Vegas? Will the suburbs be ineffably changed? Which cities and regions can come back strong? And which will never come back at all?




Monday, February 23, 2009

Margaret J. Wheatley: Eight Fearless Questions

http://www.margaretwheatley.com/articles/eightfearlessquestions.html

My friend Chris Corrigan has added 3 more questions ....(at the end).


EIGHT FEARLESS QUESTIONS

Excerpt from "A Call to Fearlessness for Gentle Leaders" address at the Shambhala Institute Core Program, Halifax, June 2006

by Margaret Wheatley ©2006


I think these questions are worth holding for a while.


How do you call yourself? How do you identify yourself? And have you chosen a name for yourself that is big enough to hold your life's work?

I have a colleague who first suggested this to me. And he said, "So many of us choose names that are too small for a whole life." So, we call ourselves, 'cancer survivors;' that seems to be a very bold name, but is it big enough to hold a life? Or, 'children of abuse.' Or, we call ourselves 'orphans,' or 'widows,' or 'martyrs'.... are these names big enough to hold your life?

And the second question that just occurred to me as I was doing this is, Are we choosing names that demand fearlessness? You're a coach. You're an executive. You're a consultant. You're a teacher. You're a minister. You're a hospital administrator. You're a civil servant. Are those names demanding fearlessness of us? I don't know what the names are that would create fearlessness, but I think this is a very important question.


What's so bad about fear?

Fear has a lot of positive attributes when you think about it. First of all, it gives us adrenaline. So it gives us the energy we need, the surging we need, to really do things that, then, look courageous. So, fear could be a good thing.

The second thing about fear is that it's instantly available. You don't have to do any work here; you just have a thought and suddenly you're afraid.

And the other good thing about fear is that it's a constant companion. Day and night. Waking and dreaming. It's always there.

So, what is there to fear about fear? I don't know the answer to that question yet. So, I just ask you to consider it. But, it seems to me that a lot of our fear is based on wanting to protect and defend ourselves. And a lot of fear arises when we're so focused on ourselves that we lose our engagement with the world. If the way out of fearfulness is to stop identifying so terribly with ourselves and with the self that we're trying to protect and defend and nourish, then this leads us into the possibility that the way out of fearfulness is to connect with the greater world.


Does the world need us to be fearless?

What's going on in the world, and does it require a different response from us? Does the world need us to be fearless? Here's a poem that I wrote a while ago, that also expressed my views on this:

The flags are flying at half-mast. Again.
This one drapes across the highway as I drive toward it.
It's over-sized, the type of flag that became popular when patriotism
needed to be more visible.
It suffocates the road, limp, lifeless.
Wind attempts to lift its spirit but
the flag refuses so
laden with sorrow.

This flag is for Katrina.
I remember another massive flag that
flared-out defiantly in the fierce wind after 9-11.

The world I see will soon be lost in lifeless flags.
We are only at the beginning.

Last night, I threw out a salt container that still had some salt in it.
I wanted to clear out space in my crowded cabinet.
As I tossed it in the garbage, it came to me. There will
come such scarcity that even those few grains will be treasure.
I still threw it out, but I vowed to remember this night.

Now, how do I live whole-heartedly?

Every time a flag gets lowered, I tell myself:
This is what it feels like as a culture dies.
This is what it feels like in the age of destruction.
This is what groundless feels like.
Don't grasp for ground.
Don't grasp.

Groundlessness has to be learned.
I am teaching myself with these terrifying mantras.


What if we can't save the world?

What if our efforts come to nothing? What if, at the end of our lives, we die having watched destruction and not been able to create any good effect?

What, really, is available to us if we can't save the world? What do we fund our work for? Where do we gain energy if we don't believe that we're going to be successful? How can we do our work without hope that we will succeed?

There's something very interesting to understand about hope. That is, that hope and fear are one. Any time we're hopeful, we don't know it necessarily, but we're bringing in fear. Because fear is the constant, unavoidable companion of hope. What this simply means is that I hope for a certain outcome and I'm afraid I won't get it. I hope for a certain result and I'm fearful it won't happen. This is the way that hope and fear are wedded together. There is a place called, "beyond hope and fear." It is to be free from hope, so that we are free from fear.

So, it might be that the road to fearlessness is only found by giving up hope. By giving up outcomes, by giving up goals.

I find this to be an intolerable posture, by the way. If we don't have hope, where will we find our motivation? If we don't have hope, who will save the world? If we go down in despair - which seems to be the alternative to hope in many peoples' imaginations, who will save the world?

What if your work achieves nothing? Thomas Merton, a great writer and contemplative in the Catholic tradition, said, "Do not depend on the hope of results. You may have to face the fact that your work will be apparently worthless and even achieve no result at all, if not, perhaps, results opposite to what you expect.

"As you get used to this idea of your work achieving nothing, you start more and more to concentrate not on the results but on the value, the rightness, the truth of the work itself. And there, too, a great deal has to be gone through, as, gradually, you struggle less and less for an idea and more and more for specific people. The range tends to narrow down, but it gets much more real. In the end, it is the reality of personal relationships that saves everything."

What would it feel like to find our fearlessness with each other? For those relationships to be enough? For us to feel we would have made a significant contribution, and led a good life, just because we cared for, loved, consoled a few people? This is quite a frightening thought; to shift from saving the world to loving a few people? Doesn't seem like that will do it, does it?


What is it like to live in the future now?

I was given a passage by the Brazilian theologian, Ruben Alvez, who described hope in this way:

"What is hope? It is the presentiment that imagination is more real and reality less real than it looks. It is the suspicion that the overwhelming brutality of fact that oppresses us and represses us is not the last word. It is the hunch that reality is more complex than the realists want us to believe, that the frontiers of the possible are not determined by the limits of the actual, and that, in a miraculous and unexpected way, life is preparing the creative events which will open the way to freedom and to resurrection.

"But, hope must live with suffering. Suffering, without hope, produces resentment and despair. And hope, without suffering, creates illusions, naiveté, and drunkenness. So, let us plant dates, even though we who plant them will never eat them. We must live by the love of what we will never see.

"This is the secret of discipline. Such disciplined love is what has given saints, revolutionaries, and martyrs the courage to die for the future they envision; they make their own bodies the seed of their highest hope."

I'm finding this to be a very provocative exploration of hope, not comfortable at all. I don't actually want to make my body the seed of the future I hope for, or the seed of my own highest hope. I don't really want to have to sacrifice that much. I don't think I really know what "disciplined love" is. I don't understand that.


Why do we imprison ourselves? Why are we so afraid?

The American poet, Robert Bly, wrote:

"If we don't lift our voices, we allow
others (who are ourselves) to rob the house.
Every day we steal from ourselves knowledge gained over a thousand years."

Why do we imprison ourselves? And what's the nature of the bars? What's the nature of the prison?

I think some of the prison bars that we have constructed for ourselves are our fear of losing our jobs. Our fear of not being liked. Our need for approval. Our desire to make important changes but not have to risk anything at all. So, we still want the comfort of this life and it feels like a bigger risk to step out and say, "No," or to say, "You can't do that to me." It feels like a larger risk, because I think the real prison we're in is our affluence, and our focus on our affluence or our hypnosis around material goods. I offer you this to think about: what is it that keeps you from acting fearlessly?

I'm quite perplexed by how fearful we are as cultures now in North America, and in Europe: we're so damned fearful of losing what we have, we're not noticing that we're losing what we have through our silence.

Why do we put up these bars that keep us back from doing what we know needs to be done? What impedes us from standing forward for those things that nurture us, our hearts, and our spirits? Bernice Johnson Reagon, who was very active in the civil rights movements and also a wonderful singer, co-founder of Sweet Honey in the Rock, tells the story of looking back at those days of the civil rights movement, now from the safety and comfort of a successful life and career. She said, "In those days, we used to go out onto the streets, we used to protest. They would shoot at us, and someone would get killed. And then we'd go to their funeral and then we'd mourn and we'd grieve. And then the next day, we'd go back on the streets and protest some more." And she said, "When I look back, now, I think we were crazy to do that." But, then she said this. "But, when you're doing what you're supposed to do be doing, it's somebody else's job to kill you."


Can we work beyond hope and fear?

Can we find a way to be motivated, to be energetic, to be happy; to take delight in the work that we're doing that isn't based on outcomes, that isn't based on needing to see a particular result? Is that even available?

What if we could offer our work as a gift so lightly, and with so much love, that that's really the source of fearlessness? We don't need it to be accepted in any one way. We don't need it to create any certain outcome. We don't need it to be any one thing. It is in the way we offer it, that the work transforms us. It is in the way we offer our work as a gift to those we love, to those we care about, to the issues we care about. It is in the way we offer the work that we find fearlessness. Beyond hope and fear, I think, is the possibility of love.


What would it take for us to just deal with what is? To not need to be always engaged in changing the world?

Yitzhak Perlman, the great violinist, was playing in New York. Yitzhak Perlman was crippled by polio as a young child, so the bottom part of his body doesn't work well and he wears these very prominent leg braces and comes on in crutches, in a very painful, slow way, hauling himself across the stage. Then he sits down and, very carefully, unbuckles the leg braces and lays them down, puts down his crutches, and then picks up his violin. So, this night the audience had watched him slowly, painfully, walk across the stage; and he began to play. And, suddenly, there was a loud noise in the hall that signaled that one of his four strings on his violin had just snapped.

Everyone expected that they would be watching Yitzhak Perlman put back the leg braces, walk slowly across the stage, and find a new violin. But this is what happened. Yitzhak Perlman closed his eyes for a moment. Yitzhak Perlman paused. And then he signaled for the conductor to begin again. And he began from where they had left off. And here's the description of his playing, from Jack Riemer in the Houston Chronicle:

"He played with such passion, and such power, and such purity, as people had never heard before. Of course, everyone knew that it was impossible to play this symphonic work with three strings. I know that. You know that. But that night, Yitzhak Perlman did not know that. You could see him modulating, changing, recomposing the piece in his head. At one point, it sounded like he was de-tuning the strings to get new sounds from them that they had never made before. When he finished, there was an awe-filed silence in the room. And then people rose and cheered. Everyone was screaming and cheering and doing everything we could to show how much we appreciated what he had just done. He smiled. He wiped the sweat from his brow. He raised his bow to us. And then he said, not boastfully, but in a quiet and pensive and reverent tone,

"'You know, sometimes it is the artist's task to find out how much music you can still make with what you have left.'"

Sometimes, it is our task to find out how much music we can make with what we have left. What is the name that is big enough to hold your fearlessness, that is big enough to call you into fearlessness? That is big enough to break your heart? To allow you to open to the suffering that is this world right now and to not become immobilized by fear and to not become immobilized by comfort? What is the way in which you can hold your work so that you do feel free from hope.... and therefore free from fear?

.

  1. When have I been fearless in my life?
  2. Who am I called to be for these times?
  3. What is the question that you could live into for the next 30 days that would keep these insights alive as (an enduring) learning journey for you?

______________________________________________


Bio

Margaret Wheatley writes, teaches, and speaks about radically new practices and ideas for organizing in chaotic times. She works to create organizations of all types where people are known as the blessing, not the problem. She is President Emerita of The Berkana Institute, a charitable global leadership foundation serving life-affirming leaders, and has been an organizational consultant for many years, as well as a professor of management in two graduate programs.

Her newest book, Finding Our Way: Leadership for an Uncertain Time, was released in January 2005. Her book, Turning to One Another: Simple Conversations to Restore Hope to the Future, (January 2002) proposes that real social change comes from the ageless process of people thinking together in conversation. Wheatley’s work also appears in two award-winning books, Leadership and the New Science (1992, 1999) and A Simpler Way (with Myron Kellner-Rogers, 1996,) plus several videos and articles.

She draws many of her ideas from new science and life’s ability to organize in self-organizing, systemic, and cooperative modes. And, increasingly her models for new organizations are drawn from her understanding of many different cultures and spiritual traditions. Her articles and work can be accessed at www.margaretwheatley.com, or 801-377-2996 in Utah, USA.

--  <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.winterfolkcamp.com">http://www.winterfolkcamp.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.haliburtonfolk.com">http://www.haliburtonfolk.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.environmenthaliburton.ca">http://www.environmenthaliburton.ca</a> ---------------------------------------------- `·.¸ ><((((º> .·´¯`·.¸.·<º))))><¸.·´¯·.¸ `·.¸.·´¯`·.¸ ><((((º> ¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º> <º))))><·.¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸ ·..·´¯`·. <º))))><.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·<º))))><   Eric Lilius Box 27 (1563 Eagle Lake Road) Eagle Lake, ON  K0M 1M0 CANADA W78.34.12/N45.07.09 705-754-9873 705-754-9860 (fax) mobile: 705-854-0311 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="Skype:ericlilius">Skype:ericlilius</a> -------------------------------------------------------------- What you people call your natural resources, our people call our relatives. Oren Lyons, Onondaga elder  How can we best serve all the children of all species for all time? William McDonough  If it can't be reduced, reused, repaired, rebuilt, refurbished, refinished, resold, recycled or composted,  then it should be restricted, redesigned or removed from production. Pete Seeger from "If It Can't Be Reduced"...  lyrics adapted verbatim from a zero-waste resolution  passed by the Berkeley, California, city council  If you don't use your own imagination,  somebody else is going to use it for you. Ronald Sukenick    


Friday, January 16, 2009

Phosphorus ban would help lakes reduce algae

Jan. 9, 2009

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Measure would ban phosphorus from lawns

By Lee Bergquist of the Journal Sentinel


Fertilizer that contains phosphorus could be banned from Wisconsin lawns, golf courses and other grassy areas by next year.Phosphorus stimulates plant growth and has long been a component in most traditional fertilizers. It is the middle of three numbers used to describe ingredients on fertilizer packages.

Key Democratic lawmakers will hold a news conference detailing the legislation.Lawmakers have tried to advance a phosphorus ban in the past, but the prospects for passage improves this year because Democrats now control both the Senate and the Assembly.

Rep. Spencer Black (D-Madison) and Sen. Mark Miller (D-Monona) are the leading co-sponsors of the legislation. Black said Friday the legislation is part of an "ambitious environmental agenda" in the new session aimed at attacking an array of water-quality problems.

In the case of a phosphorus ban, advocates hope that limiting its use will reduce algae blooms on lakes and other waterways.If approved, the bill circulating among lawmakers would go into effect one year after passage.Farm use would not be affected.

Dane County and 31 villages and towns, including a dozen in southeastern Wisconsin, already restrict the use of phosphorus-based fertilizers by property owners, according to the Wisconsin Association of Lakes.They include the town, village and city of Oconomowoc, Village of Chenequa, Village of Nashotah and town and city of Delavan.

"(Phosphorus) is essentially plant food," said Tami Jackson, a spokeswoman for the association, spurring algae blooms, crowding out useful plants and eating up oxygen that causes fish kills.Dane County banned phosphorus in fertilizer in January 2005.Sue Jones, watershed management coordinator for Dane County, said it was premature to judge whether the ban is improving water quality.

And that's the problem, said Karl Schimmel, president of Lawns of Wisconsin Network, a trade group.He described phosphorus bans as "feel-good legislation."

The group agrees phosphorus can harm lakes and streams but believes fertilizer gets a bad rap when other sources of phosphorus, such as manure runoff and goose and duck feces, also contribute to the problem.Lawn-care companies have been offering fertilizer without phosphorus in recent years as the demand for the product and local restrictions have grown, Schimmel said.

Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the largest business lobby, hopes a compromise can be struck. Scott Manley, director of environmental policy, said a statewide ban is preferable to patchwork regulation. But he said language in the bill puts the onus on retailers and should be placed on fertilizer users.

There are limitations in the legislation. Phosphorus-based fertilizer could be used on new lawns and grass where soil is deficient. Milorganite brand fertilizer also gets a reprieve, according to the bill. Milorganite contains 2% phosphorus.

Jeff Spence, director of marketing for Milorganite at the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District, said that phosphorus from organic sources tends to leach slower into water than synthetic fertilizer.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/37341199.html

Thursday, January 1, 2009

Massive EU crackdown on the use of scores of toxic pesticides


December 21, 2008

Massive crackdown on the use of scores of toxic pesticides

New EU rules, opposed by Gordon Brown, will phase out use of cancer- causing compounds in Britain

Britain is to get its toughest crackdown on toxic substances in food and the environment, despite determined resistance to the safety measures from Gordon Brown.

Scores of pesticides suspected of causing cancer, DNA damage and "gender-bender" effects are to be phased out under new EU rules, which are being hailed as a revolution in the way the public is protected against poisonous chemicals.

The use of all pesticides in public places is to be dramatically reduced, with aerial spraying banned anywhere in the country.

Yesterday environmentalists hailed the measures – to be adopted following long negotiations between the European Parliament and individual governments – as a "landmark", while the National Farmers' Union called them "devastating". The agrochemical industry has bitterly resisted them, backed by the Prime Minister, who has voiced his concern that they would damage agriculture and food production without significantly benefiting health or the environment.

Almost half of all food eaten throughout Europe has been discovered to be contaminated by pesticides, with six of the most dangerous substances among the 10 most frequently found.

The European Parliament has long been pressing, with strong cross- party support, for radical controls, despite opposition from some governments, especially Britain. The new measures are the result of a compromise between the two sides, hammered out last week.

Under the deal, a list of 22 particularly hazardous chemicals used in scores of herbicides, fungicides and insecticides will gradually be phased out to avoid abrupt withdrawal from the market. The chemicals will be given a further five years' grace if banning them would put crops in serious danger. Pesticide use is to be kept to "a minimum" in parks, playgrounds, schools and near hospitals. Aerial spraying will be banned unless given exceptional approval by safety authorities.

Industry will have to release the results of any studies that show harmful effects, and there is to be better protection for bees, whose numbers have been falling alarmingly across Europe.

The National Farmers' Union said that the measures – which will have to be finally confirmed by the Parliament and EU leaders early in the new year – "will have a devastating effect on the horticultural industry and will see a reduction in crop yield and quality", and would also force up prices.

But environmentalists dismissed this as "scaremongering", pointing out that only a small minority of the 507 substances in pesticides would be banned. Though they would have liked even tougher controls, they still hailed the agreement as a breakthrough. Hiltrud Breyer, the German Green MEP who steered the proposals through the parliament, called them a "milestone for the environment, health and consumer protection". "The EU is setting a global precedent by phasing out highly toxic pesticides," she said.

Yesterday, Nick Mole, of the Pesticides Action Network, said: "This is a landmark, the biggest ever crackdown on poisonous chemicals... It says that anything hazardous to health or the environment will have to go, rather than taking the position... that if it is used properly it can be tolerated."

[iCopyright] © 2008 Independent News and Media. All rights reserved.

http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MjI0NTI5OA%3D%3D

--  <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.haliburtonfolk.com">http://www.haliburtonfolk.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.environmenthaliburton.ca">http://www.environmenthaliburton.ca</a> ---------------------------------------------- `·.¸ ><((((º> .·´¯`·.¸.·<º))))><¸.·´¯·.¸ `·.¸.·´¯`·.¸ ><((((º> ¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º> <º))))><·.¸.·´¯`·.¸><((((º>·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸ ·..·´¯`·. <º))))><.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·<º))))><   Eric Lilius Box 27 (1563 Eagle Lake Road) Eagle Lake, ON  K0M 1M0 CANADA W78.34.12/N45.07.09 705-754-9873 705-754-9860 (fax) mobile: 705-854-0311 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="Skype:ericlilius">Skype:ericlilius</a> -------------------------------------------------------------- What you people call your natural resources, our people call our relatives. Oren Lyons, Onondaga elder  "How can we best serve all the children of all species for all time?” William McDonough  If it can't be reduced, reused, repaired, rebuilt, refurbished, refinished, resold, recycled or composted,  then it should be restricted, redesigned or removed from production. Pete Seeger     

Thursday, December 4, 2008

Ocean currents can power the world, say scientists - Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/renewableenergy/3535012/Ocean-currents-can-power-the-world-say-scientists.html


A revolutionary device that can harness energy from slow-moving rivers and ocean currents could provide enough power for the entire world, scientists claim.

 

Existing technologies require an average current of five or six knots to operate efficiently, while most of the earth's currents are slower than three knots Photo: AP

The technology can generate electricity in water flowing at a rate of less than one knot - about one mile an hour - meaning it could operate on most waterways and sea beds around the globe.

Existing technologies which use water power, relying on the action of waves, tides or faster currents created by dams, are far more limited in where they can be used, and also cause greater obstructions when they are built in rivers or the sea. Turbines and water mills need an average current of five or six knots to operate efficiently, while most of the earth's currents are slower than three knots.

The new device, which has been inspired by the way fish swim, consists of a system of cylinders positioned horizontal to the water flow and attached to springs.

As water flows past, the cylinder creates vortices, which push and pull the cylinder up and down. The mechanical energy in the vibrations is then converted into electricity.

Cylinders arranged over a cubic metre of the sea or river bed in a flow of three knots can produce 51 watts. This is more efficient than similar-sized turbines or wave generators, and the amount of power produced can increase sharply if the flow is faster or if more cylinders are added.

A "field" of cylinders built on the sea bed over a 1km by 1.5km area, and the height of a two-storey house, with a flow of just three knots, could generate enough power for around 100,000 homes. Just a few of the cylinders, stacked in a short ladder, could power an anchored ship or a lighthouse.

Systems could be sited on river beds or suspended in the ocean. The scientists behind the technology, which has been developed in research funded by the US government, say that generating power in this way would potentially cost only around 3.5p per kilowatt hour, compared to about 4.5p for wind energy and between 10p and 31p for solar power. They say the technology would require up to 50 times less ocean acreage than wave power generation.

The system, conceived by scientists at the University of Michigan, is called Vivace, or "vortex-induced vibrations for aquatic clean energy".

Michael Bernitsas, a professor of naval architecture at the university, said it was based on the changes in water speed that are caused when a current flows past an obstruction. Eddies or vortices, formed in the water flow, can move objects up and down or left and right.

"This is a totally new method of extracting energy from water flow," said Mr Bernitsas. "Fish curve their bodies to glide between the vortices shed by the bodies of the fish in front of them. Their muscle power alone could not propel them through the water at the speed they go, so they ride in each other's wake."

Such vibrations, which were first observed 500 years ago by Leonardo DaVinci in the form of "Aeolian Tones", can cause damage to structures built in water, like docks and oil rigs. But Mr Bernitsas added: "We enhance the vibrations and harness this powerful and destructive force in nature.

"If we could harness 0.1 per cent of the energy in the ocean, we could support the energy needs of 15 billion people. In the English Channel, for example, there is a very strong current, so you produce a lot of power."

Because the parts only oscillate slowly, the technology is likely to be less harmful to aquatic wildlife than dams or water turbines. And as the installations can be positioned far below the surface of the sea, there would be less interference with shipping, recreational boat users, fishing and tourism.

The engineers are now deploying a prototype device in the Detroit River, which has a flow of less than two knots. Their work, funded by the US Department of Energy and the US Office of Naval Research, is published in the current issue of the quarterly Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering.



Tuesday, December 2, 2008

EcoDriving USA

http://www.ecodrivingusa.com/#/be-an-ecodriver/


--------------------------------------------------------------
What you people call your natural resources, our people call our relatives.
Oren Lyons, Onondaga elder

"How can we best serve all the children of all species for all time?"
William McDonough

If it can't be reduced, reused, repaired, rebuilt, refurbished, refinished, resold, recycled or composted,
then it should be restricted, redesigned or removed from production.
Pete Seeger