NOTES:

- An excellent video that explains the benefits of CCS technologies in capturing carbon dioxide emissions. Technology could become critical in the fight against climate change and global warming. CCS stands for Carbon Capture Sequestration.

- Energy security is also an important factor because of the abundant availability of coal. The EU believes that CCS technology should form part of the measures in reducing greenhouse gases and an integral part of receiving energy from the supply of coal. The European Union has set exacting targets for EU countries for both 2030 and 2050 in regards to the reducing of carbon emissions. CCS technologies could become an important instrument within the building of the proposed new clean-coal power station at Kingsnorth.

CRITICAL

An energy future that becomes reliant on coal does, however, have implications worth considering. For example, if ‘clean-coal' power stations were to be built most of the coal would need to be transported from countries such as Australia and Latin America, creating vast amounts of carbon emissions during the shipping and transportation process.

Critically, even if coal technologies do increase the ratio of energy produced to CO2 released, some will still be released into the atmosphere. The cost of implementing clean coal technology is prohibitive and the length of time needed to develop technologies like pulverised coal or gasification to the point of substantial difference to the environment is far too long.

‘Clean coal technology' has been argued to gradually nudge the efficiency of coal-fired plants upwards. But, pertinently, that could take anything up to 50-years to reach the efficiency levels required in benefiting from such technology.

If we continue on our current course, the environment will likely be damaged irreparably. Growing evidence suggests, though, that it would be better for our governments to invest money by improving renewable energy technologies such as wind or, solar power towers which have been proven to work in Madrid as well as within the new solar-powered plantations in China.

© Text: Mark Dowe, 2008

Click here - to go to the website to listen

Welcome to the August 21, 2008 edition of the Imagine 2050 audio blogcast. This week we take to the streets in Oakland, California where we do some more “on-the-street” style interviews. While this type of interviewing is tough, especially for those talking as here they are minding their own business, walking down the street and someone accosts them with tough questions. However, it’s not the perfect answer that we are after here. No, what we are after is to hear what people have to say in response to the demographic shifts of 2050. It is usually this exclamation that convinces people to jump in and contribute.

In regards to this month’s edition, it does run a little longer than I intended it to. But I think you will find the discussion engaging and I hope it inspires you to make your own comments here on the Imagine 2050 blog. Thanks to all for their continued feedback and support!

Imagine 2050 Blogcast - August 21, 2008

Some questions you might like to respond to:

• What does Richard mean when he says America has sold out and because we are now “owned” by other countries there are no longer any “Americans”?
• How do we more positively address the anti-immigrant sentiments that Richard puts out? How do we explain them?

Writing in response (amended):

A number of 'nuclear' power stations will be reaching the end of their usefulness and economic lives in the next few years as several sites are due to be decommissioned. The closures will leave a significant 'energy gap' which requires filled by other means. I endorse Mr. Clegg's views in seeking further innovations and the use of new technologies in how future energy supplies might be harnessed. The difficulty, though, is finding a composite mix because of the relative nature of the 'intermittent argument', i.e. wind power cannot be generated when the wind does not blow or energy from tidal waves might be below desired levels if the tides are weak.

Mr. Clegg's arguments presented in his article, here, reconcile with the requirements of the EU in that members are required in cutting back on their carbon emissions drastically by 2050. However, those targets do not just assume that future energy supplies be derived purely from renewable sources, but does encourage, more widely, technological developments within the energy sector. It is right that the government focusses on this area by insisting, for example, that revenues earned from the sale of surplus carbon credits are invested for new renewable technologies. This might also be a way in how less developed countries might be helped.

Part of the 'mix' will, invariably, have to come from clean-coal. The proposals in building the new clean-coal power station at Kingsnorth does have credibility because, not only is coal in abundant supply but carbon capturing mechanisms (CCS) - the apparatus used in sequestering carbon - should be a vital element in removing what would otherwise amount to voluminous levels of carbon dioxide being emitted to the atmosphere. Whilst technology is expensive, the economies of scale that would likely accrue from generating energy from clean coal power stations would be substantial. CCS seeks to remove carbon dioxide by pumping it directly underground.

For many people, driving energy from nuclear power isn't a viable option at all. In Scotland, for instance, there remains public and parliamentary sceptism over the dangers and risks associated with anything nuclear. The line between nuclear energy and nuclear weapons is a paper thin one; spent fuel-rods, for instance, could be acquired in the building of a nuclear arsenal. Scotland, however, is different to England in terms of how it will receive its future energy supplies considering that the nation here has 25% of the total renewable energy supplies of the EU at her disposal. Worth mentioning, though, is the incredibly successful tidal barrage scheme within the Pentland Firth, in the North of Scotland, providing now much more energy for more communities than had first been envisaged.

Many thanks,

© Mark Dowe 2008: all rights protected

- the writer campaigns on behalf of WWF (Scotland)

I sing along with Kenny, Bobby and Susan.  I watch my white co- workers moving around like misfortunate  worker bees. Ahh, less white people in America, kinda sounds like music to my ears. Sing on Kenny logins, sing on.  ( I wonder what the world would look like by 2042-2050?)

10 Things I'm sure would change: 

1. George Clooney would never make 'Peoples top 25 most beautiful' list ever again.

2. I could actually watch t.v . ( I wouldn't be engulfed by mundane, back to back episodes of Sienfeld.) 

3. The History channel would make more sense, and perhapes become more accurate. ( In regards to Egypt-African history) 

4. Hot dogs would become an illegal food substance .

5. Blue Eyed Soul would never be mentioned again.

6. The 4th of July would look more like party time at the French Quarters, in New Orleans. ( Mardi- Gras) 

7. Elvis Who? ( Chuck Berry would be considered the king of Rock-n Roll)

8. Shark attacks would decrease ( say goodbye to bungy jumping too folks!)

9. Racism would cool off an additional 40 percent.

10. I could have black neighbors for a change, outside of the ghetto!

Ok, but wait. There's always a flip side to everything. If white's aren't going to be the majority by 2040, then who will be?  Well here's what the numbers are saying.

"By 2050, whites will make up 46 percent of the population and blacks will make up 15 percent, a relatively small increase from today. Hispanics, who make up about 15 percent of the population today, will account for 30 percent in 2050, according to the new projections.

Asians, which make up about 5 percent of the population, are projected to increase to 9 percent by 2050."

It's a damn shame, black people numbers aren't jumping! Then again we are the most racist peers amongst each other. No breeding allowed in 'black mental town.' Infact if we removed the birracial children from the numbers, I'm sure we would see a decrease in birth rates 'In da hood' as well. Uh, oh!

On that note...

It  appears to me, that the next negro generations will have to get use to Barbacoa and Frejoles!  1. Barbacoa is made from cow heads that are typically steamed rather than smoked.

OH DAYUM JEEENA!!! Or is it more like "White people we're coming to join ya honey," as Fred Sanford would probably say, back in the days.

So much for my 'life with less white people in it.  Back to work my black ass goes!

-2thesun-

Here's the new data calculated for 2050:

Whites - 46%

Blacks - 15%

Hispanics - 30%

Asians - 9%

I have a new poll about the new data and I'm curious what you think!

Don't worry, it's completely anonymous, so no one will know your answer.

To vote, click here! (look to the right of the screen on the site!)

It's on imagine2050!

Interesting....

While I have no beef with their study, I do have an issue with folks blaming immigrants for all of America's problems. It's no like the economy will magically recover and air pollution will go away if we close down the borders.

But that's exactly what Washington think-tanks, like the Center for Immigration Studies, wants you to think. They're like the bully in your 5th grade class that likes to pick out the nerdest and weakest kid in the room and beat him or her up because his parents fight everyday or he's just a spoiled brat. Center for Immigration Studies is like that spoiled kid that starts screaming on the top of their lungs when they're no longer the center of attention.

AND....the Center for Immigration Studies likes to hang out with white nationalists - the new modern day white supremacists that have to hide their real agendas in a post-civil rights era.

Check out the full story at IMAGINE 2050

The Political Center Is Not Where It Seems

I have an addiction and I going to tell you what it is.

I’m addicted to CNN (Cable News Network). I love CNN and watch it constantly.Something has always fascinated me about 24-hour news coverage. When CNN started its second news channel nearly a decade ago I was elated because I could flip between channels with my remote control and really get continuous news, but I digress. When CNN first started they marketed the channel to news junkies like me by focusing on the “sports minute,” the “weather minute, and my personal favorite the “fashion minute.”

The “fashion minute” would cover fashion shows from all around the world. I had a love and hate relationship with the “fashion minute.” I would love to sit in front of the television watching all of the latest fashions coming down the runway and say to myself, “I hate that, no one is ever going to wear that.”

I mean come on. No one wears 23 inch heels, gold embroidered into their clothing and hats that are 70 feet in diameter. Well at least not anyone I know. I suspect that if you have ever seen fashions shows on television that you probably agree with me. I would proudly announce to my long suffering roommates that fashion designs were “too out there!” and “too extreme!”

However, as I continued my love and hate relationship with CNN’s “fashion minute” I began to notice something incredible happening. The fashions I saw coming down the runway were influencing the styles of clothes being sold in clothing stores each season.

Of course the clothes being sold were not as extreme as the designs coming down the runway but the influence was definitely there. I remember watching 70s fashions appearing on the runways in the late 80s and telling my friends that “the fashion industry has gone way too far this time, I mean the 70s were enough for everyone!” Of course by the time the mid-90s came around 70s clothing designs were back in full force including the bell bottom. The best rated comedy on television was That 70s Show. Even Wal-Mart couldn’t help but join the chorus by running commercials with a big yellow smiley face slashing prices.

To read the full article, check out IMAGINE 2050!

By 2050, minorities will be the majority in America, and the number of residents older than 65 will more than double, according to projections released Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau. The Census Bureau looks at 2000 results and assumptions about future childbearing, mortality rates and migration. Minorities, classified as those of any race other than non-Hispanic, single-race whites, currently constitute about a third of the U.S. population, according to Census figures. But by 2042, they are projected to become the majority, making up more than half the population. By 2050, 54 percent of the population will be minorities.

Minority children are projected to reach that milestone even sooner. By 2023, the bureau said, more than half of all children will be minorities. "Part of it is a higher fertility rate for some of the minority groups, Hispanics in particular," said Dave Waddington, chief of the Census Bureau's population projection branch, which issued the report. "Those groups also tend to be more of the childbearing age. Non-Hispanic white people tend to be a little bit older."

The projections are based on Census 2000 results and assumptions about future childbearing, mortality rates and net international migration, the bureau said. The group predicted to post the most dramatic gain is the Hispanic population. It is projected to nearly triple, from 46.7 million to 132.8 million, from 2008 through 2050, the bureau said. Its share of the total U.S. population is expected to double from 15 to 30 percent. "Thus, one in three U.S. residents would be Hispanic," the Census Bureau said in a news release. The African-American population is projected to increase from 41.1 million to 65.7 million by 2050, going from 14 percent of the U.S. population to 15 percent. The Asian-American population is expected to increase from 15.5 million to 40.6 million, or from 5.1 percent to 9.2 percent of the population. Among the remaining races, the bureau said, American Indians and Alaska natives are projected to increase from 3.9 million to 8.6 million, going from 1.6 percent to 2 percent of the U.S. population. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders are expected to more than double, increasing from 1.1 to 2.6 million. In addition, the number of U.S. residents identifying themselves as being of two or more races is projected to more than triple, increasing to 16.2 million from its current 5.2 million, the Census Bureau said.

Meanwhile, the non-Hispanic white population is not expected to post dramatic gains in the same period. By 2050, whites are expected to number 203.3 million, slightly increased from the 2008 number of 199.8 million. Whites will comprise 46 percent of the U.S. population by 2050, down from the current level of 66 percent, the bureau said, as the group is projected to lose population in the 2030s and 2040s. By 2030, all baby boomers will be age 65 and older -- comprising nearly 20 percent of U.S. residents, or one in five Americans, the bureau said. By 2050, the 65-and-older age group will increase to 88.5 million, more than doubling its current number of 38.7 million. Meanwhile, the number of those age 85 and older is expected to more than triple, from 5.4 million in 2008 to 19 million by 2050. Non-Hispanic whites make up most of the baby boomers, Waddington said. "They're in a higher mortality rate ... nonminority groups tend to be older and dying off faster" instead of reproducing at the rate projected for minorities.

Obviously, the projections will have "very strong policy implications," he said -- medical care for an increasingly elderly population, for instance, educational needs for increasing numbers of minority children and economic effects for the labor force. "Who's going to do the jobs that are characteristically held right now by certain types of people?" Waddington said. "All those things are subject to change. "The United States is projected to reach the 400 million population milestone in 2039, according to bureau projections. By 2050, the population is expected to be 439 million. Of those, 235.7 million are expected to be minorities.

As U.S. cities and towns have increasingly become more diverse, Census officials knew the day of a majority minority would come, Waddington said. And "the aging one is sort of simple," he added. "That's demography 101."

Other highlights from the report released Thursday:

• By 2050, 62 percent of the nation's children will be minorities, up from 44 percent today. Of those, 39 percent are projected to be Hispanic, up from 22 percent in 2008, and 38 percent are projected to be white, down from 56 percent in 2008

• The percentage of the U.S. population between the ages of 18 and 64 -- the "working age" population -- is projected to decrease to 57 percent in 2050 from 63 percent in 2008.

• The working-age population will become more than 50 percent minority in 2039, and by 2050 will constitute 55 percent of the population.

• By 2050, the working-age population will be more than 30 percent Hispanic, up from 15 percent in 2008; 15 percent African-American, up from 13 percent in 2008; and 9.6 percent Asian, up from 5.3 percent in 2008.

Desde tiempos remotos el ser humano ha creado conflictos y guerras para tener el control sobre recursos que ambiciosamente quiere poseer. Las concecuencias de esto es solo millones y millones de gente muerta, invalidos, desaparecidos, estancamiento demográfico y pobreza. Y como único factor de beneficio tenemos el desarrollo tecnológico. Actualmente se teme por la creación de una tercer guerra mundial en donde los protagonistas no dudaran en utilizar armas nucleares y otras armas de destrucción masivas, lo que es de suponer, sería un camino rapido para la destrucción definitiva de la vida en el planeta tierra (estamos matando lentamente).

Los países bélicos enfocan su esfuerzo en crear nuevas formas de ataque que les permita someter a cualquier país independientemente en el ambiente que esten. La gran importancia de las Tecnologias de la Información que pueden ser accesadas a traves de Internet han llevado a que se genere un nuevo entorno para lo que será la 3ra guerra mundial: "Cyber Guerra".

La invasión física militar hacia países debiles es la causa principal del origen de las guerras mundiales, sin embargo, ahora con la facilidad de acceso a internet y a super computadoras personales, el inicio de la 3ra Guerra mundial se esta dando por el espionaje en el ciberespacio, el mundo sera para quien tenga la capacidad de controlar el tráfico en internet, tenga la capacidad de restringir el acceso a toda la población de un país, un continente, a todo el mundo, es entonces en donde surgira un caos total, bancos, tiendas, sistemas de medición metereólogicos, la televisión, cualquier sistema dependiente del ciberespacio internet sera inutilizable. Es en este momento que las grandes potencias mundiales destinaran la mayor parte de sus recursos para poder restablecer el acceso a la red de redes. Alguna vez has imaginado que será del mundo sin internet ?

Como protagonista principal al impulso a la 3r guerra mundial esta China, que actualmente es uno de los paises con mayor crecimiento económico y presencia diplomática, los cuales le han permitido invertir considerablemente en desarollo de tecnologías enfocadas al espionaje y ciber ataques  hacia otros paises. De seguir asi, se estima que para el año 2050 China tendrá la capacidad de interrumpir completamente los medios de comunicación de cualqueir país enemigo. De los paises mas afectados sobre ciber ataques esta Estados Unidos, India, Bélgica, Alemania y Reino Unido. Aunque la mayoría de estos ataques provienen de China, ningun país ha querido reclamar estas agreciones y formalizar el inicio de la guerra, aun asi cuando las grandes potencias tienen el conocimiento que China posee una inmensa infraestructura disponible para la cyber guerra (y que ya esta poniendo en práctica). En base a esta amenaza 140 paises ya estan trabajando en ciber armas que despues de los proximos 5 años se mirará quien de ellos ocupa la supremacia virtual.

Sera capaz China de controlar el flujo de la comunicación virtual?

La ciber guerra sera la forma de guerra en el futuro?

Estamos listos para vivir sin internet?

Los ingenieros de software/hardware seran los nuevos soldados en batalla?

---------------

En la fila de reclutamiento militar desde defensetech

Calling climate change "one of the great global challenges of our time," the world's richest nations and emerging powers joined together Wednesday for the first time to commit themselves to pursue long-range cuts in global greenhouse gas emissions, but were split on how to achieve that goal.

The declaration grew out of an unprecedented meeting that brought together 16 nations and the European Union - a group dubbed the "major economies" - around the issue of global warning. The 16 are the Group of 8 industrialized nations: the United States, Japan, Germany, France, Canada, Italy, Britain and Russia; the Group of 5 emerging economies: China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa; and three other major trading nations: Australia, South Korea and Indonesia.

The session, organized by President George W. Bush, took place here on the northernmost Japanese island of Hokkaido, where leaders of the Group of 8 wrapped up three days of meetings on Wednesday.

On Tuesday, leaders of the Group of 8 pledged to "move toward a carbon-free society" by cutting emissions of heat-trapping gases in half by 2050. But Group of 5 poorer countries refused to sign onto that goal. They are holding out until rich nations like the United States take more aggressive steps to cut pollution over the next decade.

That fissure prevented the 16 countries from "reaching any meaningful understanding" in the special Wednesday session, said one expert, Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists. But an environmental campaigner, Phillip Clapp of the Pew Environmental Group, said the declaration helped set the stage for the next American president to grapple with climate change when the United Nations conducts negotiations on a binding treaty in Copenhagen, Denmark, in 2009.

"It is good that the developing countries have embraced the principal of a global target that they will participate in," Clapp said. "It would have been better if the United States and the other G-8 countries would have been willing to step up to the plate and make a strong commitment about what they would do over the next 10 years. "

Bush claimed success.

"In order to address climate change, all major economies must be at the table," he said before flying back to Washington. "And that's what took place today."

But the meetings did not produce a long-term emissions goal accepted by all the countries, rich and emerging, which was the goal the Bush administration had sought since announcing the "major economies" effort last year.

For Bush, who is trying to salvage his legacy on climate change late in his administration after years of international pressure to take a more aggressive stance, the back-to-back declarations were still an important step. Bush has long insisted that any international treaty include developing nations like China and India.

"This is an enormous movement for a man who questioned the science on global warming, who was opposed to international treaties and who was opposed to international targets," said Clapp, a frequent critic of the president's policies. "Here he is leading the way trying to get a global target. He's gotten the developing countries to acknowledge there should be a global goal."

Although the meeting put the United States on record for the first time as embracing a specific long-term goal, environmentalists complained that the declaration by the G-8 did not go far enough.

" Major economies meeting turns into major embarrassment meeting for G8," the WWF, formerly the World Wildlife Fund, said in a statement.

Together, the countries that issued the declaration are responsible for more than 80 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions that scientists have said are warming the planet. But there is a dispute between rich and poor nations over how to set targets, and who should bear the brunt of the responsibility.

There is also a dispute over the starting point for the Group of 8 plan to halve emissions by 2050. There was no mention of a baseline in the group's declaration.

Many scientists say cutting emissions in half by 2050 is not enough to combat climate change, and that it would take an 80 percent drop from 2008 levels to limit chances of runaway warming and centuries of rising sea levels. Developing countries agree.

Under a proposal put forth by China, India, Mexico, South Africa and Brazil, developed nations would cut emissions between 25 and 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020. David Doniger, an expert on climate change at the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington, predicted the two sides could come together, but probably not until a new president is in the White House.

To read the article in its entirety, please click here.

To read the G8 statement on energy security and climate change, please click here.

For more about the G8 Summit in Japan, click here.

2007:
In setting a global goal for emissions reductions in the process we have agreed today involving all major emitters, we will consider seriously the decisions made by the European Union, Canada and Japan which include at least a halving of global emissions by 2050. - full statement (pdf)

2008:
"We seek to share with all parties to the UNFCCC the vision of, and together with them to consider and adopt in the UNFCCC negotiations, the goal of achieving at least 50% reduction of global emissions by 2050, recognising that this global challenge can only be met by a global response, in particular, by the contributions from all major economies, consistent with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities." - full statement

So after a year of 'seriously considering', the men in suits who rule the world have moved to 'sharing the vision', with a bit more time to 'consider', and more crucially, 'adopt' the goal of halving emissions by 2050.

There's no denying that's progress, particularly now the US are on board (godspeed November and the back of Bush), but I'd hesitate to declare it strong, decisive or urgent. Even if that goes through, adopting a goal is a far cry from actually legislating cuts in emissions. Still, it's better than climate change falling off the agenda altogether. Let's just hope world temperatures move at an even slower pace than our political processes.

Some personal remarks

Today it gets a bit personal and subjective, sorry for that. Ok, it is quite inevitable that on the occasion of G8 some "selected" men come together, men which have met the selection criteria of a political system, as it is today in the early 21st century, sometimes a strange fabric of political, of media and economic power. Great opportunity to see the elected leaders Bush, Berlusconi and Sarkozy at one place and analyzing their different "semiotics of power". When I watch the scene, their "tv faces", their postures then there seems to be some contrast to the severity of the situation ahead (maybe I am somehow biased as a futurist and analyst).

All just looks like a "business as usual" thing – and this is a bit shocking.

The communiqué says: “We seek to share with all parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change….the goal of achieving at least 50 per cent reduction of global emissions by 2050.”

... On mid-term targets, it says: “We acknowledge our leadership role and each of us will implement ambitious economy-wide mid-term goals in order to achieve absolute emissions reductions and, where applicable, first stop the growth of emissions as soon as possible.”

The latter phrase appears to be an accommodation to the US position, which is that it will stabilise emissions by 2020 before cutting them after that.

Peter Grant, international director of Tearfund, an advocy group, said: “Concrete commitments on climate change are the acid test of success at this summit. The G8 are crawling forward on emissions cuts at a time when giant leaps and bounds are needed." FT.com / In depth - G8 leaders reach deal on climate change

And then the inevitable "symbol production" for the always hungry media society – seven men and one woman are planting those little trees (of hope – and we need a lot of hope with these type of politicians). And in this moment they look even less like the leaders I could have the confidence to solve the coming global super crisis.

(Image source: Screenshot FT.com / In depth - G8 leaders reach deal on climate change)

Top climate scientist blasts G8 climate pledge

Agence France-Presse
First Posted 22:44:00 07/08/2008

PARIS -- One of the world's most respected climate scientists on Tuesday slammed the G8 summit's goal of halving global warming emissions by 2050 as "worse than worthless."

Leaders of the world's richest nations, meeting in Japan, "are taking actions that guarantee that we deliver to our children climate catastrophes that are out of our control," US expert James Hansen said in an e-mail to Agence France-Presse.

The G8 leaders have proved they do not understand the climate situation, have no idea how serious it is, have no sense of urgency, and are just playing a game with our children's lives.

The Guardian video shows you what a good time our leaders are having in Japan, symbolically planting trees while they commit to nothing in particular to stop carbon emissions from coal.  (They'll have to plant a LOT of trees to make up for that overarching failure on their part to address the coal-dependent climate challenge.)

The AFP article continues with consideration and adoption of a 2050 goal for which most of these leaders will not live long enough to be held accountable:

At their summit in the resort town of Toyako, the leaders of the Group of Eight nations -- Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States -- agreed Tuesday to "consider and adopt" the goal of achieving the 50-percent cut in worldwide emissions by mid-centur

As far as a 2020 goal, in which timeframe most of these leaders should still be alive and kicking, and should be held accountable:

But they made no targeted pledge for action next decade, nor did they mention specific action against coal, which Hansen characterized as the greatest peril.

"A statement of any goal for percent reduction is worthless. Indeed, it is worse than that: it is a pretence that they understand the problem and plan to take needed actions," said Hansen.

Since the leaders are so dense, we need some engaging gimmick to get Hansen's message across that carbon emissions from coal MUST be eliminated (captured and stored).  They keep on missing his KEY point:

The only way to avoid climate catastrophe, argued Hansen, was to halt the emissions of coal, the most abundant and highly polluting of all fossil fuels.

He reiterated a call for a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants and for existing ones to be fitted with technology to capture the CO2 and store it deep underground.

"Otherwise we are sending a death sentence to uncountable species and are leaving our children with an ungodly mess," he said.

Sky-rocketing oil prices have spurred energy-efficiency plans in many countries but at the same time have intensified the use of coal around the world, especially in developing juggernauts China and India.

In the old days, people read books about Practical Coal Mining,,, like these well-thumbed copies in the National Museum of Welsh Life, Cardiff.  I doubt a book on Practical Coal Moratoria would be opened, let alone thumbed, these days by any of the so-called leaders.  How are we going to get through to them?

On regarde le site du dernier sommet du G8 et on voit bien que l’enjeu de l’environnement y est important. Pourtant, dans les faits, avec une entente floue sur la réduction de 50% des GES d’ici 2050, son importance ne va pas plus loin qu’une image, dans le sens qu’on se donne « une bonne image »! À ce rythme, puisque l’an dernier on avait seulement fait le pas « d’envisager sérieusement » cette réduction, il n’est quasiment pas exagéré de penser que les choses bougeront vraiment aux alentours de 2050...

Et en plus, comme je l’ai déjà expliqué, je crois qu’il serait préférable de parler de réduction globale de la pollution que de réchauffement climatique. La pollution se voit, se sent, s’entend, se ressent, rend malade et tue, tandis que le réchauffement ressemble plus à un épouvantail idéologique qu’à une réalité.

Aussi, ce bal des puissances est bien plus efficace pour parler que pour faire, comme on le voit bien avec le problème de la crise alimentaire. Ces puissances créent d’immenses problèmes, mais ne font que tourner à vide ensuite, comme des adolescents irresponsables.

Misère de misère...

"Åtgärden" medför att atmosfärens halt av koldioxid, som redan är för hög, tillåts öka på ett sätt som världens ledande forskare visar leder till situationer som med svårighet kommer att kunna bäras av våra samhällen. Beslutet kan bara vara fattat utifrån politiska grunder, inte från vetenskapliga kunskap

Den enda rimliga slutsatsen är att den yttersta eliten av våra politiska makthavare inte förmår göra en relevant omvärldsanalys, faktagranskning samt riskanalys. Det kommer att stå oss dyrt.

De som är lite vakna av oss medborgare bör förbereda sig på dels omfattande förändringar i klimat och ekosystem samt konsekvenser för infrastruktur, hälsa och samhällen (läs IPCC WG2), dels på att beslutsfattare kommande år tvingas fatta ännu radikalare beslut för att minska klimatpåverkan.

Goldman Sachs argues that the economic potential of Brazil, Russia, India and China is such that they may become among the four most dominant economies by the year 2050.

Qlog : 5 Minutes

1. What are the Strengths/Weakness for Brazil , Russia , India and China?

2. What economic factors are conducive towards BRIC's growth trend?

3. How can we compare BRIC with ROW (Rest of the World)?

4. What is Geo-Politics ? How does it affect BRIC and ROW?

5. What are the key leading indicators towards this milestone "2050" ?

]]> http://markdowe.wordpress.com/?p=412 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:53:54 +0000 markdowe http://markdowe.wordpress.com/?p=412 RESEARCH COMMISSIONED by WWF, published today, calls for the G8 countries to commit at their annual summit in Japan to significant and binding targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions The research, the G8 Climate Scorecards 2008, shows that the UK leads other G8 nations in its efforts to achieve Kyoto reduction targets, but all eight counties are still moving too slowly to combat climate change.

The independent report, commissioned jointly by WWF and financial services provider Allianz, examines the climate performance of the G8 nations according to nine criteria. These compare emission trends since 1990 and examine each country's progress against their Kyoto targets. Countries are scored on three specific policy areas: energy efficiency, renewable energy, and development of carbon markets.

Decisive action

The report calls for leaders at the G8 Summit to commit to a binding long-term target emission reductions of 80% by 2050, and as close to 40% as possible by 2020.

"Looking at the G8 group as a whole, none of the leading industrialised countries are set to reduce emissions enough to avoid devastating global warming," said Keith Allott, head of climate change at WWF-UK. "The G8 should pledge financial and technological support for low carbon development.

"If we take decisive action now, it could translate into a more stable climate - both for the environment and in terms of economic success."

Rising emissions

In the race to reduce emissions, the UK is in front, with France in second place and Germany in third. But all three countries are, at best, half as far along the road as they should be.

The UK has introduced innovative policies such as the Climate Change Bill but, says the report, it does too little to increase its use of renewable energy and foster energy efficiency. Also, the share of coal is currently rising in the UK energy mix, which drives emissions up.

At the bottom of the rankings are Canada and the US. Both countries have rising emissions and energy-intensive economies, and have failed to realise the full potential of energy efficiency improvements.

Developing countries

The report also analyses the climate and energy policies of five emerging economies: Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa. It reveals great differences between the countries in terms of development, energy mix, and resulting emissions. The report raises the question of how G8 countries will help these economies to develop in a less carbon-intensive manner.

"The G8 should put in place adaptation measures in developing countries that are measurable, reportable and verifiable," said Allott. "We only have 10 to 15 years left in which global emissions must peak and decline, so time is clearly running out."

- The writer campaigns on behalf of WWF (Scotland)

Related:

• Bush signs G8 deal to halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2050

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/08/g8

Las cosas que hoy me parecen estúpidas y/o absurdas, mañana serán mi pan de cada día.
Apénas hace 10 años se me hacía imposible imaginar que existiera (y tuviera) un celular con cámara de fotos/video y capácidad para mp3 a un tamaño no más grande que mi mano.

Ahora en estos tiempos en que yo un iMortal cualquiera tengo un blog administrado desde una humilde laptop pero ultratecnológica y potente comparandola con la que tenía mi papá hace 15 años, sale un tal David Levy autor de un libro llamado "Amor + sexo con robots" diciendo que las relaciones sexuales con amor (WTF?) serán una realidad en el 2050.

La muñeca inflable que cabe escondida en una caja de zapatos y las sábanas con diseños raros se quedarán aquí en el presente, el futuro es para ese robot que le dirás "te amo" o "baby te quiero wooo".  

"Estamos hablando de relaciones de amor. Calculo que esto puede ocurrir dentro de 40 años. Será posible cuando haya robots que tengan emociones, personalidad, conciencia. Podrán hablarnos, hacernos reir, decirnos que nos aman, así como un humano podría decirte ahora: te quiero" dice Levy en una conferencia internacional en la Universidad de Maastricht, Holanda.

"En solo cinco años, antes de que este tipo de robots alegre la vida de 'tímidos, feos, quien tenga problemas sexuales o de personalidad o simplemente quien no tenga relaciones satisfactorias con humanos', llegará un avance en forma de muñecas sexuales optimizadas, superiores a las que se venden en la actualidad”, dice Levy. Estas tendrán un discurso electrónico y sensores que les capacitarán para emitir “sonidos agradables” cuando los humanos acaricien sus “zonas erógenas”.

Durante las conferencias y mesas redondas, algunas con títulos tan disparatados como 'Yo robot, tú Jane', los participantes del congreso han escuchado teorías como las de Levy, quien se atrevió a dar lugar y fecha de la posibilidad de una unión legal entre robots y humanos. "Mi predicción es que alrededor del 2050, el estado de Massachussets será el primero en legalizar los matrimonios con robots", dijo David Levy días antes de presentar su tesis doctoral.

Para llegar a estas afirmaciones, Levy tuvo que emplearse a fondo y basar sus teorías del futuro de la robótica y la inteligencia artificial en otras ciencias como la estadística, psicología, sexología o sociología. En Amor + sexo con robots', título de su último libro, Levy predice que los robots se volverán tán humanos en la apariencia, funciones y personalidad que mucha gente se enamorará de ellos, tendrá sexo con ellos y hasta se casará con ellos.

Ante esto, a Levy le han salido detractores, como el roboticista Ronald Arkin del Instituto de Tecnología de Georgia, quien en octubre del año pasado no daba crédito a las declaraciones del investigador holandés. "Si tú me preguntas si los humanos querrán casarse con un robot, mi respuesta sería probablemente no. Pero habrá gente para todo. Hay personas que ahora mismo se casarían con algún juguete sexual", decía Arkin en 2007 a Livescience.com.

Será que un día podré descargar de Ares una Shakira todita para mi como la Lucy Liu de Fry? solo espero que pueda perrear igual de cabrón que la original.

Otra cosa, el homo-sapiens es una especie estúpida que se cree superior y no sabe aprovechar lo que tiene, acaso necesitamos una réplica robótica?

Pic from WarNet.ws (a very NSFW site)

Im Grunde sollte doch eigentlich klar sein, ob man an einem Gerät hängen will, oder nicht. Solange ich nicht aus eigener Kraft am Leben bleiben kann, soll´s halt nicht sein. Bringt doch nichts, dem Schicksal ein Bein stellen zu wollen. Das geht eh nach hinten los. An den lieben Gott glaube ich ja nicht, und schon gar nicht an die heilige Jungfrau, aber das da irgendwas ist, merke ich schon in meinen Hirnwindungen. Warum also der Fügung in den Arsch treten und sein eigenes Ding durchziehen? In dem Zusammenhang fällt mir das Pyramidenmodell der durchschnittlichen Lebenserwartung deutscher Bürger ein. Ist doch erschreckend, wie das verläuft. Moderne Technik macht es möglich. Gesundes Essen. Ausreichend Vitamine und erstklassige ärztliche Betreuung. Vorsorgeuntersuchungen und Präventionen. Ist das eine erstrebenswerte Entwicklung? Sollte man der Natur nicht ihren Lauf lassen? ... Ich hol mir jetzt n Keks. Schreibt mir, Kinder. Mich interessieren eure Meinungen.

Oui, j'y réponds très à la bourre, mais mieux vaut tard que jamais, et oui ça ne sera pas un article rempli de petits liens, mais un article sur moi-même

Alors en 2050..

Comment que je me vois ?

Vieux déjà, c'est irréfutable j'aurais *compte* 62 ans, avec une femme, le chien sur le drap du lit, et avec mon Windows Nine, et mon linux/mac (oui le marché de linux aura mangé Mac :x) J'aurais épousé une geekette pire que moi, avec des bagues de mariage fait en port ethernet.

Les oridnateurs seront commandés directement avec notre cerveau (j'vais pas commander grand chose avec la taille de mon cerveau :o)

Mais en tout cas, on pourra dire "j'ai survécu à tout ça, petit jeune" tout en se remettant le dentier en place.

The album opens with Aa gaya hoon mein, apparently a stage song portraying the arrival debutante Harman Baweja into the movie. Vocals don't quite sound like KK's though its credited to him. IMO, its too slow to be a rocking stage number! Jaane kaisi hai teri meri yeh love story is supposedly the title track which appears in a sad and a happy version. It starts off with some soft tunes and whistles and progresses rather sweetly into a dreamland-like sequence - with the Millennium music bit making its appearance quite regularly. The sad versions is again by Shaan and this time the Millennium music bit is a soft lilting violin tune. Its a more vocal-oriented track with accompanying violin n' piano bits & a soft background chorus. Meelon ka tha faasla starts off with the Millennium music bit and even has some strains of jaane kaisi hai imbibed in it. A duet sung by KK and Alka Yagnik, it charts the lovers' journey across time, so as to say. There's a haunting female vocal in the background that is quite prominent and I find myself humming that quite often! This one also has a sad version which starts off exactly in the same fashion as the happy version but is bereft of any high-sounding beats. Again, a vocally intensive track with KK hitting high notes with his dreamy voice. The female vocal background is more prominent in this one and is intersped with the millennium music bit.

Mausam achanak yeh badla hai kyun is a melodious ditty that is filled with references to nature and in a romantic way. Shaan and Alka Yagnik croon this number with apparent ease. The romantic number gives way to a naughty and raunchy Hey Loverboy, will you be my toy! One can pinpoint that it is sung by Alisha Chinai right at the start itself. Of course, the recurring de de de de de dey chants make our task easy (referring to Alisha's Made In India album). Mixed with electric beats and a sensuous tone, this one's got a nightclub feel to it. Picturize this with a red-haired Priyanka Chopra and you've got a heady combo! Sach kehna is a solo number hummed by Kunal Ganjawala which has the whole I'm-trying-to-woo-you feel to it. IMO its the weakest song in the album, one which I'm sure to skip on later hearings. The best song of the lot is the upbeat and techno Milo na Milo which has some innovative mechanical sounds combined with heady drumbeats. The promos are all showing this track and that underlines its value as the best track of them all. Shaan does a swell job in this stageshow song.

Overall, a decent album with at least one very good songs and three good ones. If it weren't for an overkill of the millennium music bit! Of course, the bit adds zing to the tracks but initially it was noticed in the teaser promos only and was thought of as restricted to that itself. In fact, we had the same debate on ITwoFS regarding its usage in the trailer vis-a-vis the songs. There's also a track from Himesh Reshammiya but that isn't released yet.

But, in my opinion, there is something missing. Somehow, the Logo should emphasise the cultural side of the city. The new Philharmonic is on the way, the theaters, the musicians, all the cultural richness spreading in Szczecin should be integrated in this new project.

Anyway, as a foreign person living in this wonderful city, I really see future in this project. Sometimes people form Szczecin underestimate their city, and this kind of ideas can make them proud of living in this great place.

1980's

Personal Computers | Bank Machines | Networks | MiniVans | CD ROM | e-mail | KB

1990's

Internet | Online Shopping | Search Engines | Portals | Pictures | SUV | DVD | Webmail | MB

2000's

Environment | Social Networking | Mobile | Broadband | Hybrid Cars | video | Thumb Drive | Messenger | GB

2010's

Cradle To Cradle | Electric Cars | Oled Walls | Digital Paper | Micropayments | Nanotech | Solar Panels Everywhere | TB

2020's

Mediated Reality | Genetic Tech | No New Gasoline Cars | Oled Everywhere | Room Junkies

2030's

Public Space Travel | Molecular Computing | Implants To Extend Life 10 Years | Holograms Everywhere

2040's

World Council | No-waste Nuclear Batteries | Artificial Intelligence Passes Turing Test | Communication Implants

2050's

World Currency | Space Resorts and Colonies | Life Extended By 40 Years | Nano Plague | Mind Mapping and Storage