Energy Change for Climate Control
RSS icon Home icon
  • War Gaming Iran (3) : “Wretched tyrant” : David Cameron calls out Bashar al-Assad

    Posted on January 19th, 2012 Jo 1 comment

    I was doing my regular trawl of news, and happened upon the latest accusation against Iran. According to the intelligence community in several countries, Iran has been supplying weapons to the Syrian government, to use in its violent “crackdown” on the “peaceful” protestor-rebels.

    I have no in-depth insider knowledge of arms trafficking, so I couldn’t say for certain whether this claim was accurate – but when I found that David Cameron had called out Bashar al-Assad, the President of Syria, as a “wretched tyrant”, I knew I was looking at war propaganda.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9023322/David-Cameron-accuses-Iran-of-supplying-Syria-weapons.html

    “David Cameron accuses Iran of supplying Syria weapons : David Cameron accused the Iranian regime of supplying weapons for the Syrian onslaught on democracy protests yesterday as Russia’s foreign minister warned that the West was set on a path to war with Tehran : By Damien McElroy, Foreign Affairs Correspondent : 18 January 2012 : The Prime Minister revealed that British officials had been told that weapons shipments from Iran to Syria had been intercepted by Turkey and that intelligence reports confirmed that Hizbollah, the Iranian-backed Lebanese movement, was actively involved in the slaughter of Syria. “There is now growing evidence that Iran is providing a huge amount of support,” he told the House of Commons. “There have been interceptions of some shipments by Turkey which are particularly interesting. People should also know that Hizbollah is an organisation standing up and supporting this wretched tyrant who is killing so many of his own people.” Mounting frustration in Whitehall over the role of foreign support for the Syrian regime to suppress the uprising has seen the Government, along with other Western powers, switch tactics in recent days. After deferring to an Arab League initiative to send in monitoring teams to defuse violence, diplomats now want a UN Security Council resolution condemning the regime…”

    Damien McElroy. Hasn’t he been awarded tassels and gongs for his replication of the narratives of State in the past ? Has he just re-gurgitated something emailed to him, or off the telly, or has he checked his facts about the flow of armaments in the Middle East ?

    He’s not the only one to mirror the Establishment narrative, however :-

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16609789

    “18 January 2012…Meanwhile, the UK has accused Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah movement of helping the Syrian government suppress dissent…”People should also know that Hezbollah is an organisation standing up and supporting this wretched tyrant who is killing so many of his own people,” he added, referring to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad…”

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2088452/Cameron-calls-Assad-wretched-tyrant-calls-tougher-sanctions-Syria.html

    “18th January 2012 : David Cameron branded President Bashar al-Assad a ‘wretched tyrant’ as he told Parliament that Britain should play a leading role in urging the international community to step up sanctions against Syria. The Prime Minister claimed there was growing evidence that both Iran and militant group Hezbollah were helping to prop up the Syrian leader. He said: ‘Britain needs to lead the way in making sure we tighten the sanctions, the travel bans, the asset freezes, on Syria. ‘In terms of who is actually helping the Syrian government to oppress their people, there is now growing evidence that Iran is providing a huge amount of support. ‘People should also know that Hezbollah is also an organisation that is standing up and supporting this wretched tyrant who is killing so many of his own people.’ ”

    Who started this rumour ? Why, the Americans of course :-

    http://news.yahoo.com/iran-supplying-weapons-syria-crackdown-us-officials-051958520.html

    “Iran supplying weapons to Syria crackdown: US officials : By Stephen Collinson : Sat, Jan 14, 2012 : The United States believes Iran is supplying munitions to aid Syria’s bloody protest crackdown in an initiative spearheaded by Tehran’s revolutionary guard supremo, according to senior US officials. Qasem Soleimani, head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps elite Quds force, was in the Syrian capital this month, one official said on Friday, in what Washington sees as the most concrete sign yet that Iranian aid to Syria includes military hardware. “We are confident that he was received at the highest levels of the Syrian government, including by President Assad,” the official said on condition of anonymity. We think this relates to Iranian support for the Syrian government’s attempts to suppress its people.” The official said Washington has reason to believe that Iran is supplying security-related equipment “including munitions” to Syrian forces. “The US government believes Iran has supplied Syria with munitions” for use in the military crackdown, he said. The United States has long suspected that Iran has been aiding Syria’s purge against protesters as Assad tries to cling to power and avoid the fate of other Arab dictators felled by the Arab Spring uprisings…”

    What has Iran to say of this slur ?

    http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/26836-iran-rejects-french-charge-of-arms-to-syria

    “17 January 2012 : Iran on Tuesday denied an allegation from France that it was sending weapons to its ally Syria in violation of a U.N. embargo. “The declarations from French officials are incorrect,” Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters in a regular weekly briefing. “Unfortunately we often see political positions by officials from some European countries, this time by France, that are baseless and not backed by proof,” he said. France’s foreign ministry said on Monday that Iran has repeatedly violated a U.N. arms embargo by exporting weapons to Syria, which is roiled by internal strife. French foreign ministry spokesman Romain Nadal said a U.N. panel of experts had informed the U.N. Security Council of “illegal and deeply shocking” violations of the embargo by Iran. “We condemn these violations and call on Iran and Syria to comply with Security Council resolutions,” Nadal said…”

    Well, whether or not there’s any truth in this latest anti-Iran meme, nobody has accused anybody in Russia of being wretched or tyrannical in supplying arms to Syria :-

    http://en.rian.ru/world/20111201/169209507.html

    “01/12/2011 : MOSCOW, December 1 (RIA Novosti) : EU sanctions against Syria do not prohibit Russian arms supplies to the Arab country, First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said on Thursday. Asked whether Russia would supply weapons to Syria despite EU sanctions, he said: “Are they banned or what?” “Russia will do whatever is not prohibited by any regulations, rules or agreements,” he said. Moscow is against an arms embargo on Syria, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Tuesday. The United States and European Union have already banned arms supplies to Damascus, and the Arab League proposed to follow suit during its meeting on Syria on Sunday. Russia is Syria’s major arms supplier, with contracts worth at least $4 billion as of 2011. International pressure on the regime of President Bashar al-Assad has mounted in the past few weeks over his intensified crackdown on dissent.”

    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-18/russia-rejects-u-s-criticism-over-munitions-delivery-to-syria.html

    “Russia Rejects U.S. Criticism Over Munitions Delivery to Syria : January 18, 2012 : Russia rejected U.S. criticism over a Russian arms shipment to Syria, saying it’s not acting illegally by supplying weapons to the Middle Eastern country. “We don’t consider it necessary to explain or justify ourselves because we aren’t breaking any international agreements or UN Security Council resolutions,” Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters in Moscow today. Russia accuses western countries of seeking to overthrow Assad and has blocked sanctions against Syria at the Security Council. The U.S. and European Union have both imposed an arms embargo against Syria, where more than 5,000 people have died in a crackdown on unrest that began in March, according to the United Nations. The U.S. has “very grave concern” about arms reaching Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, said yesterday after news reports that a Russian shipment of ammunition arrived in Syria. Chariot, a Russian-owned ship carrying bullets, was detained by Cypriot authorities last week and allowed to proceed after agreeing to change its destination to Turkey. The ship stopped transmitting its automatic-recognition signal and went to the Syrian port of Tartus instead, the Cypriot national broadcaster CyBC reported, without saying where it got the information. : ‘Overdue’ Embargo : “Unfortunately there is not an arms embargo against Syria, which we certainly think is overdue, in part because as you well know some members of the council including Russia have indicated opposition to any form of sanctions,” Rice said in New York yesterday. Russia has weapons contracts with Syria of at least $3 billion, according to the Moscow-based Center for the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies. The orders include Yakhont anti- ship cruise missiles, MiG-29 fighter jets and Pantsir short- range air-defense systems. The port of Tartus is the only Russian base outside the former Soviet republics. Lavrov said Russia only trades with Syria what is legal under international law. “Unilateral sanctions imposed by the U.S. and EU and some other countries can’t be regarded as legitimate as far as Russia’s actions are concerned,” he said.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/thawing-cold-war-russia-found-be-supplying-syria-weapons-us-not-amused

    “Thawing The Cold War: Russia Found To Be Supplying Syria With Weapons, US Not Amused : Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/13/2012 13:47 : Remember the cold war: evil Empire, 5 year plans, Lada cars, etc? It may very well be back, this time over the simple matter of a few million barrels of crude per day, after Russia was found to be quietly supplying an embargoed Syria with ammunition, in violation of a weapons embargo. Reuters reports: “A Russian-operated ship carrying a cargo of ammunition has reached conflict-torn Syria after being temporarily halted during a refuelling stop in Cyprus, sources in Russia and Cyprus said on Friday. A source in Cyprus, where the ship made an unscheduled stop for refuelling late on Tuesday, said the ship had given written assurances to authorities its destination would not be Syria but Turkey. It was allowed to sail a day later, whereupon it dropped off conventional tracking systems, switched course and reached Syria on Thursday. “It had bullets. There were four containers on board,” a Cypriot official told Reuters.” And here the plot thickens: we now have some war mongering deepthroat somewhere in Leningrad, pardon, St. Petersburg: “The ship was carrying a dangerous cargo,” the source at St. Petersburg-based Westberg Ltd. said by telephone on condition of anonymity. “It reached Syria on Jan. 11th.” Needless to say, the US is not very happy that Russia is doing precisely what it warned a few months ago it would do: namely protect its sphere of influence especially in light of the ever-encroaching NATO aspirations (yes, provocations go both ways as Ron Paul has long been warning): “The United States said on Friday it had raised concerns with Moscow over a Russian-operated ship that has arrived in Syria and which sources said contained a cargo of bullets. “With regard to the ship we have raised our concerns about this both with Russia and with Cyprus, which was the last port of call for the ship, and we are continuing to seek clarification as to what went down here,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said.” Looks like the escalation in the Straits of Hormuz is about to shift to the backburner as we finally go back to where the real tension is and always has been: between West and East…”

    This is a bit rich, you would have thought, for Russia to be arming the Syrian regime when it is also playing the “no foreign military interference” card :-

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ghmByi9H13AEjOI7Bwo1cT5FAPKg?docId=a2ce450b256f4fe1b2e60832841cea7d

    “Russia vows to block Western intervention in Syria : By ZEINA KARAM, Associated Press – 18 January 2012 : BEIRUT (AP) — Syria’s powerful allies in Russia vowed Wednesday to block any Western attempts to intervene militarily in Syria as Damascus fights off an increasingly chaotic 10-month-old revolt against President Bashar Assad. The support came as Assad was showing fresh confidence that he can ride out the uprising with the help of a small — but influential — set of friends in Russia, China and Iran. Iran also gave Syria another boost Wednesday. According to Iran’s semi-official ISNA news agency, with the commander of Iran’s Quds Force, Brig. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, said Assad’s government enjoys public support and won’t collapse…”

    And Iran is also condemning foreign interference :-

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/17/riad-al-asaar-syria-intervention_n_1209950.html

    “17 January 2012 : Iran condemned what it called foreign interference in the affairs of its closest Arab ally, Syria, and praised reforms President Assad has promised as “problem-solving”. “We are fundamentally against interfering in the affairs of other countries. We think it does not solve the problems but will only make them more complicated,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told a news conference. Assad, while proffering reform, has vowed to crush his opponents with an “iron fist”, but Syrians braving bullets and torture chambers appear equally determined to add him to the list of the past year’s toppled Arab leaders…”

    And then, there’s the delicate question of who’s arming the Syrian rebels ?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/8917265/Libyas-new-rulers-offer-weapons-to-Syrian-rebels.html

    “25 November 2011 : Libya’s new rulers offer weapons to Syrian rebels : Syrian rebels held secret talks with Libya’s new authorities on Friday, aiming to secure weapons and money for their insurgency against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, The Daily Telegraph has learned. By Ruth Sherlock, in Misurata GMT 25 Nov 2011 : At the meeting, which was held in Istanbul and included Turkish officials, the Syrians requested “assistance” from the Libyan representatives and were offered arms, and potentially volunteers. “There is something being planned to send weapons and even Libyan fighters to Syria,” said a Libyan source, speaking on condition of anonymity. “There is a military intervention on the way. Within a few weeks you will see.” The Telegraph has also learned that preliminary discussions about arms supplies took place when members of the Syrian National Council [SNC] – the country’s main opposition movement – visited Libya earlier this month. “The Libyans are offering money, training and weapons to the Syrian National Council,” added Wisam Taris, a human rights campaigner with links to the SNC…”

    http://www.yourmiddleeast.com/news/syria-accuses-qatar-of-arming-rebels_4205

    “Syria accuses Qatar of arming rebels : AFP : Last updated: January 18, 2012 : Syria’s state-owned media on Wednesday accused Qatar of arming and financing opponents of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. Qatar’s call to send Arab troops to the country “falls within the framework of the negative role played by Qatar since the start of this crisis… through the financing of armed groups,” the Tishrin newspaper charged. The Gulf state “can help Syria get out of its crisis… by stopping its financing of armed (groups) and the trafficking of weapons” to insurgents, wrote the daily. Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Hamad Ben Khalifa al-Thani, said in an interview aired at the weekend that he backs sending Arab troops to Syria, where the regime has been trying to crush a democracy protest movement with brutal force for the past 10 months. Arab League Secretary General Nabil al-Arabi said the idea could come up for discussion at the next meeting of the pan-Arab body at its Cairo headquarters on Saturday and Sunday. The Arab bloc is expected to discuss the future of its widely criticised observer mission to Syria, where the United Nations says the regime’s crackdown on protests has cost more than 5,400 lives since March…”

    http://www.yalibnan.com/2012/01/11/hezbollah-amal-baath-members-are-arming-syrian-rebels-report/

    “Hezbollah, Amal, Baath members are arming Syrian rebels, report : JANUARY 11, 2012 : Lebanese security sources have confirmed that “dozens of members of Shiite Hezbollah and Amal movement are involved in smuggling arms across the Syrian border to the Syrian rebels.” These elements buy the weapons in Lebanon and Libya and smuggle them to the “Free Syrian Army”, mainly to Damascus countryside and Homs. The sources pointed out that “the leaders of Hezbollah in the southern suburbs of Beirut and the Bekaa, arrested a number of these cadres and seized some of the arms shipments.” According to the sources, the smugglers use the same illegal border crossings used by Hezbollah for the past 10 years to smuggle Iranian arms from the Syrian regime. The sources noted that officers of the regime’s Syrian army have been facilitating the entry of the smuggled arms to the rebels in return bribes by the Hezbollah smugglers. Lebanese security sources revealed also that “military units loyal to the Syrian government killed over the recent period a number of smugglers trying to deliver arms to the rebels in the town of Zabadani, close to the Syrian Lebanese border. In one case near Lebanon’s northern border, a number of Hezbollah members were arrested and a truck loaded with weapons was seized. In addition, Syrian forces arrested several Syrian officers, including one colonel, who were involved in the operation.

    Then there’s the report of a well-informed eye-witness :-

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/11/inside-syria-rebels-call-arms

    “Inside Syria: the rebel call for arms and ammunition : Exclusive: With Syrian rebels desperate for arms, Ghaith Abdul-Ahad finds smugglers doing a roaring trade selling guns and bullets : In his second exclusive report, Ghaith Abdul-Ahad crosses the border with the smugglers supplying weapons to Syria’s fighters : guardian.co.uk, Sunday 11 December 2011 15.11 GMT : The route across the Syrian border was marked by a single shining piece of string. It stretched from the road on the Turkish side for a few hundred metres to the steel and razor-wire fence that ran along the boundary. The smugglers followed it silently and quickly, jumping from one stone to another in the moonlight. Each man carried a thick, plastic-wrapped load on his back. The plastic bundles rattled and clinked as they ran along. Beyond the fence the shadows of men and animals moved. “Do you have money?” asked a Turkish voice. “Next shipment,” the Syrian replied. A man with a scarf wrapped around his face held the coils of barbed wire flat while the cargo was passed across and loaded on to the backs of the waiting mules. Then the men hurried the animals away from the border and up into the mountains of northern Syria. The smugglers paused on a cliff to examine the cargo. Inside the plastic packages were small boxes filled with pistols and bullets of different calibres. One of the men broke off to answer his mobile phone. It was one of several lookouts keeping watch for Syrian security forces. There was a government patrol on the mountain: the men had to split up and move quickly. “Grab the mule’s reins and run along next to it,” a smuggler hissed. In this fashion we climbed further into the mountains, playing cat and mouse with the Syrian patrol. At the edge of a small village we lay in a ditch and waited. A man whistled and a white truck appeared. It had come to collect the cargo. After eight months of vicious crackdowns by the regime of President Bashar al-Assad, Syria’s revolution is sliding towards civil war. Many in the opposition who have seen their friends and family members disappeared, tortured or shot by the Syrian security forces are looking for ways to fight back. The smugglers, sensing a business opportunity, have been quick to respond. In the south the weapons come from Lebanon. Here in the north, they are flowing in from Turkey and Iraq. “We used to smuggle cigarettes coming from Lebanon via Syria,” a portly man told me the night before in Turkey as he channel-hopped between Egyptian chatshows. Since the Syrian uprising began new business opportunities had opened up. “Now we only do weapons,” he said. “Three shipments per day.”

    The group Stratfor claims that the United States of America has been arming the Syrian rebels :-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZzEyJxRmc8
    http://rt.com/news/russian-syria-opposition-usa-319/

    “21 December 2011 : Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, a former Reagan administration official, told RT he believes Washington is doing more than simply backing the rebels diplomatically. “The United States is bold in stirring up the opposition and in arming it. They used the cover of the Arab Spring and Arab protests as they did in Libya,” he said. “These are not spontaneous protests, and certainly in an authoritarian state like Syria you wouldn’t find people in opposition able to readily supply themselves with arms, with military weapons.”…”

    What seems most likely is that several groups and countries outside Syria are arming both/all sides in the country’s conflict.

    So why is David Cameron singling out Iran ?

    Maybe it has to do with the reputation of countries, carefully constructed in the media for us over the course of decades. Russia is a superpower. The United States of America is a superpoewr. Iran is just an undeveloped minnow. Yet we have been taught to fear Iran. And Iran is under propaganda onslaught currently. So it’s Iran that becomes the “lupus in fabulam” – the wolf in the story.

    The tension between Iran and the Western Axis of Arrogance may be deflating a little – but you will see the pressure growing on the United Nations Security Council to declare that the Opthalmologist from Neasden is virtually the Devil incarnate, and that Syria needs some kind of violent aggression from NATO, or something.

  • War Gaming Iran (2)

    Posted on January 17th, 2012 Jo 1 comment

    There is evidence – plenty of evidence – that the leadership of Iran have swallowed whole the sales pitch of the Nuclear Power marketing men. They have not diverted from their openly stated aim – to establish a civilian nuclear power capability, to aid in the economic development of a nation with a very low standard of living.

    By contrast, there is no evidence, despite the propaganda spin based on the IAEA site inspection reports, that Iran has taken any steps to develop a nuclear weapons capability.

    Given the strongly voiced antipathy of the world at large to even just the concept of Iran having atomic weapons, why would Iran ever consider building any ? It just doesn’t make any sense. Iran’s constant public demands to be permitted to develop nuclear-powered electricity generation – despite widespread accusations that their nuclear programme is a cover for building nuclear warheads – just goes to show they mean what they say.

    Iran is not interested in atomic weaponry, and yet the Americans continue to accuse them of going down that path.

    Why do the Americans continue to accuse Iran of progressing towards the production of weapons grade fissile material ?

    Behind the scenes, lurking in the shadows, there are several key players – including Saudi Arabia – and there are several important playgrounds – including Iraq and Iran.

    Saudi Arabia, as we all should know from our schoolroom textbooks, is the sandy kingdom of petroleum oil, with a the ruling class rich beyond anybody’s wildest dreams. The United States of America is economically tied to Saudi Arabia. The USA has a habit of offering things other than money in exchange for imported goods and commodities. It exchanges massive containers of imported Chinese goods for reserve currency dollars that they know will never get spent. It makes private companies operating in Africa wealthy in order to import commodities at rock bottom prices through its “markets”. In exchange for clement trading conditions with Saudi Arabia, the USA exchanges investment in American private corporations. Saudi Arabia effectively owns trillions of dollars of American real estate and corporate infrastructure. Saudi interests are therefore American interests, by definition.

    Saudi Arabia also faces a huge problem – oil depletion. Yet, under the rocks of nearby Iraq and Iran, lie a significant proportion of the world’s untapped petroleum oil and Natural Gas.

    Kjell Aleklett and his colleagues at the University of Uppsala are researching this :-

    http://www4.tsl.uu.se/~aleklett/ppt/20090305_aleklett_aberdeen.pdf

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2012/jan/17/guardian-weekly-letters-20-january

    “The Iranian navy has warned it could close the strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s traded oil passes (Iran: “We’ll close the strait of Hormuz”, 13 January). This would not be good for anyone, least of all the Iranians, but it may help us to prepare for what is to come as global oil supplies begin to decline, perhaps as early as 2015…The international president for the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas, Kjell Aleklett, once suggested that nations adopt an oil depletion protocol so that remaining supplies are shared out rationally. The alternative is hardly pleasant. There are many precedents for countries going to war over diminishing resources. Until we develop alternatives, if indeed there are any, oil remains a critical resource.”, Jenny Goldie, Michelago, NSW, Australia

    The Assault on Iraq in 2003, a kind of bizarre one-sided war of aggression, seemed to have no logical basis, and the world is now recognising it didn’t have a legal standing either. What it did do was destroy the nation’s stability, wreck its infrastructure, impoverish the people, and make it easy for the world’s large oil and gas companies to set up shop – exporting Iraq’s precious hydrocarbon reserves to the world at rock-bottom prices.

    Can it be that somebody, or somebodies, maybe Saudi Arabian somebodies, want to cut a deal over Iran ? That various parties want Team America, the World Police, to blast and shoot their way into Iran, so that they can take part in the looting of Iranian energy resources ?

    I think, under that scenario, that Iran is quite within its rights to say thus far, no farther. I’m not surprised that they have claimed they can close the Strait of Hormuz. Until the contingency pipelines have been built over the desert, that one waterway is the way that something like 40% of the world’s hydrocarbon fuels are taken to market.

  • War Gaming Iran

    Posted on January 17th, 2012 Jo No comments

    You may by now have heard the story that Iran has “threatened”, or rather “warned”, that they will close the Strait of Hormuz should an embargo against trade in Iranian oil come into force.

    What you may not have heard is why Iran issued such a warning.

    Regardless of the way it is portrayed, it didn’t come out of the blue.


    I want to take you back to 13th December 2011. In an article entitled “Oil: Iran’s Hormuz Strait Threats Could Wreak Global Economic Havoc”, by Agustino Fontevecchia, Forbes.com reported Iranian MP Parviz Sorouri of the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee saying this, “Currently, the Middle East region supplies 70 percent of the world’s energy needs, (most of) which are transported through the Strait of Hormuz. We will hold an exercise to close the Strait of Hormuz in the near future. If the world wants to make the region insecure, we will make the world insecure.”

    Earlier in the article was written, “Crude oil prices surged on Tuesday on reports that Iran was set to begin war games in the Strait of Hormuz to practice closing down the key chokepoint which concentrates 30% of global seaborne oil shipments.”

    War games ? Why on Earth would Iran want to conduct strategic manoeuvres ? Clearly, Iran was responding to something. What could that have been ?

    Helpfully, the Daily Mail collated a few of the provocations, in an article entitled “‘If the world wants to make the region insecure, we will make the world insecure’: Iran threatens to shut Strait of Hormuz with military exercise” by the Daily Mail Reporter on 14th December 2011 :-

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2073769/Iran-threatens-shut-Straits-Hormuz-military-manoeuvre.html

    “…Yesterday former U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney said President Obama should have ordered an airstrike over Iran after their refusal to hand back the unmanned spyplane [drone] that crashed last week…Mr Cheney told CNN: ‘The right response would have been to go in immediately after it had gone down and destroy it…”

    “…General Hossein Salami, deputy head of Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guard, said on state television that the violation of Iran’s airspace by the U.S. drone was a ‘hostile act’ and warned of a ‘bigger’ response. Officials in Iran even believe they can ‘mass produce’ the captured bat-winged stealthy RQ-170 Sentinel and build a ‘superior’ version following its crash on December 4…”

    “…It also emerged today that Iran has lodged a complaint with Interpol following calls made during U.S. congressional hearings to assassinate members of Tehran’s security agency. Former U.S. Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Jack Keane and former CIA operative Reuel Marc Gerecht, now a senior fellow for the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told the subcommittee hearing on ‘Iranian Terror Operations on American Soil,’ that they were in favour of carrying out covert operations against members of Qods, a special unit of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. In his speech, Keane suggested sanctions against Tehran were not sufficient and suggested cyberattacks, covert actions and assassination would be more effective…”

    “…Iran’s national prosecutor general, Gholam Hossein Mohseni-Ejei told Iranian television that a case had been opened and that the judiciary was ‘providing more documents to the Interpol, so that the two Americans, who have threatened the Iranian commander with assassination, would be prosecuted.’…”

    “…The [U. S. congressional] hearing which took place on October 26, was held in response to an alleged plot by Qods to assassinate of the Saudi ambassador in Washington and carry out a string of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil…”

    “…Iranian Defense Minister Ahmad Vahidi claims the remarks were part of a ‘devilish triangle of terrorism, human rights violation and use of WMDs’ by the U.S..’…”

    “…The Iranians have also highlighted a letter to President Obama from House Homeland Security Committee chairman Rep. Peter King and two subcommittee chairs urging ‘significant covert action against the Iranian regime, including against facilities and personnel responsible for killing our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.’…”

    Now, cast your mind back a little further to the completely unbelieveable plot that sparked the U. S. congressional hearings that got the Iranians so worked up :-

    http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/11/assassination-plot-the-quds-force-connection/

    As Wikipedia records, “The allegations of an Iranian plot met with a stream of disbelief from a number of foreign officials and analysts. Senior U.S. officials struggled to explain why the Quds Force would attempt such a delicate plot in such an unskilled style. No evidence was presented implicating Iran’s most senior leaders.”

    So now let’s return to the question of why Iran should make a clear statement that they can close the Straits of Hormuz. As Press TV spells out, “On Saturday, December 24, [2011] Iran’s Navy launched a massive 10-day Velayat 90 naval exercise, covering an area stretching from the east of the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Aden…“The [Iranian] Navy’s military maneuvers in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman indicate the power and dominance of Iran’s Navy in regional waters,” member of the Majlis (parliament) National Security and Foreign Policy Committee Zohreh Elahian said Monday. The lawmaker stated that military drills also aim to increase Iran’s deterrence power and prove its regional dominance. “The exercises send an important message to the whole world, especially the colonialist powers…and also show the power of [Iran's] armed forces, particularly [the country's] Navy,” she noted.”

    Message received and understood.

    However, the message is being used by certain people to imply that Iran is the belligerent, provocative party.

    Consider the treatment of this interview with Iran’s navy chief Habibollah Sayyari :-

    http://www.presstv.ir/detail/218133.html
    “‘Closing Strait of Hormuz easy for Iran’ : Wed Dec 28, 2011 : Iran’s Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari has reiterated that the country’s naval forces can readily block the strategic Strait of Hormuz if need be, Press TV reports…”

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45805706/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/us-navy-warns-iran-hormuz-disruption-will-not-be-tolerated/#.TxS1JaXKDBY

    Like the Western mainstream media, Press TV omits to talk about the historical rationale behind Iran’s statements. Why should Press TV broadcast something that could be misinterpreted ? Could it be partly related to a deal brokered between the UK press regulator Ofcom and Press TV ?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/30/ofcom-iran-press-tv

    And now the story has been whipped up out of all proportion, consider the stance taken by the mainstream media, all peddling fear of Iran. For example, Google this Financial Times article, “Military warns gas imports at risk”, published 16th January 2012 :-

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b52cdf90-3f8b-11e1-ad6a-00144feab49a.html

    “…Since December, Iran has repeatedly threatened it would block the critical shipping lane at the mouth of the Gulf if its oil exports were blocked. One-fifth of the world’s oil and one-third of its LNG passes through the strait. Lord West, former head of the Royal Navy and security adviser to Gordon Brown when the latter was prime minister, told the Financial Times that, if the strait were blockaded, the sharp fall in the UK’s gas supplies would be the country’s single most critical issue. “I have no doubt at all that this would be the biggest problem for us,” Lord West told the Financial Times, adding that the UK would also have to weather the economic fall-out from higher global oil and gas energy prices if shipping through the strait was interrupted. The risk has risen as refiners have stopped buying Iranian oil ahead of the expected decision to enforce sanctions in response to Tehran’s attempts to develop a nuclear arms programme…”

    Anyway, Saudi Arabia has tried to step in to defuse the scare :-

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/01/16/uk-iran-idUKTRE80E0OK20120116

    “Saudi Arabia doubts Iran oil blockade claim : By Ramin Mostafavi : TEHRAN : Mon Jan 16, 2012 : Saudi Arabia on Monday expressed doubts over Iran’s claim it could block the main oil shipping route out of the Gulf and made clear it was ready to pump more oil after sanctions threatened to cut Iranian sales of crude…”

  • The Last Battle

    Posted on January 15th, 2012 Jo 1 comment

    The “Statue of Liberty” or Saint John’s Lamb of God ?

    Britain’s real enemy is not Iran.

    The real enemy is the mismanagement of the Earth’s energy resources.

    The last battle is to overcome the misdeeds of those who have commandeered and wasted the Earth’s energy resources – and that includes ourselves.

    It should not be a violent dispute, for aggression and the use of weapons are morally unjustifiable. But all the same, it will be a genuine, Titanic, struggle.

    As C. S. Lewis portrays with so much resonance, it matters little under which flag or title we serve or belong – what matters is our allegiance to the precepts of divine honour, holy devotion and right dealings with other people :-

    “Why did the faithful Taarkan end up getting to come into Narnia ? Usually Lewis writes allegorically so is he trying to tell us something when a worshipper of Tash is allowed to enter the new Narnia ? Any thoughts ? …It wasn’t the name that mattered, but rather the conduct of the Taarkan and how he chose to see and do things. He didn’t believe in the cruelty and underhanded ways his countryman were doing things, but rather in honour and a code of conduct. So even though the Taarkan thought he was worshipping Tash, the whole time he was actually worshipping Aslan [Turkish for "Lion"] through his thoughts and deeds. So when the time came for the end of the world and judgement, he was placed where his heart had always led him.”

    For those who recognise the twin threats from climate change and energy depletion, we realise that there is hard work ahead. Our natural aim is to protect ourselves; and the moral consequence is that we are obliged to protect the other – because both climate change and energy depletion are global problems.

    Climate change hits the poorest the hardest – already, significant changes in rainfall and weather patterns have created long-term drought, encroaching coastal and inland inundation, crop losses and enforced migration. And it’s only going to get worse. It’s so terrible we could not even wish it on our enemies – it teaches us that nobody is an enemy.

    To solve climate change, we need to change our energy systems. Some hail the depletion of hydrocarbon and coal energy resources as a gift that will help us resolve the emissions problem and prevent dangerous climate change, by making a virtue of necessity – but the situation is not that simple.

    The reaction of the world’s authorities, wealth controllers and corporate proprietors to the winding down of fossil fuel energy resources has so far been complex, and there are many indications that warfare, both military and economic, has been conducted in order to secure access to energy.

    This may be the way of the lion in us all, but it is not the way of The Lamb. The Lamb sacrifices all that others value so that he is qualified to bring about a new universal regime of peace and responsible autonomy – a kingdom of priests, pastors with mutual respect.

    We are called to become good stewards of each other and the Earth. The gentle Lamb of God will judge our hearts.

    The Book of the Revelation to Saint John the Divine, Chapter 4 :-

    “…I looked and saw a door that opened into heaven. Then the voice that had spoken to me at first and that sounded like a trumpet said, “Come up here ! I will show you what must happen next.” Right then the Spirit took control of me, and there in heaven I saw a throne and someone sitting on it. The one who was sitting there sparkled like precious stones of jasper and carnelian. A rainbow that looked like an emerald surrounded the throne. Twenty-four other thrones were in a circle around that throne. And on each of these thrones there was an elder dressed in white clothes and wearing a gold crown. Flashes of lightning and roars of thunder came out from the throne in the center of the circle. Seven torches, which are the seven spirits of God, were burning in front of the throne. Also in front of the throne was something that looked like a glass sea, clear as crystal…And as they worshiped the one who lives forever, they placed their crowns in front of the throne and said, “Our Lord and God, you are worthy to receive glory, honour, and power. You created all things, and by your decision [and for your pleasure] they are and were created…”

    The Book of the Revelation to Saint John the Devine, Chapter 5

    “In the right hand of the one sitting on the throne I saw a scroll that had writing on the inside and on the outside. And it was sealed in seven places. I saw a mighty angel ask with a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals ?” No one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or see inside it. I cried hard because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or see inside it. Then one of the elders said to me, “Stop crying and look ! The one who is called both the `Lion from the Tribe of Judah’ and `King David’s Great Descendant’ has won the victory. He will open the book and its seven seals.” Then I looked and saw a Lamb standing in the center of the throne…The Lamb looked as if it had once been killed. It had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God, sent out to all the earth. The Lamb went over and took the scroll from the right hand of the one who sat on the throne. After he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders knelt down before him. Each of them had a harp and a gold bowl full of incense, which are the prayers of God’s people. Then they sang a new song, “You are worthy to receive the scroll and open its seals, because you were killed. And with your own blood you bought for God people from every tribe, language, nation, and race. You let them become kings and serve God as priests, and they will rule on earth.”"

    Leaders of the powerful nations – put aside your death-hastening technology.

    Let there be a low carbon energy peace on a climate-stable Earth.


    Additional Readings

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%203:7-9&version=NIV

    “…Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles [non-Jewish people] by faith, and announced the gospel [good news of God's love and forgiveness] in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.” So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith…”

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%203:26-29&version=NIV

    “So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized [ritual bathing] into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile [non-Jewish person], neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be_Thou_My_Vision

    “Thy love in my soul and in my heart -
    Grant this to me, O King of the seven heavens.

    O King of the seven heavens grant me this -
    Thy love to be in my heart and in my soul.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Spirits_of_God

    [ UPDATE : No, I have not taken leave of any of my senses. I was in church, All Saints in Highams Park, London E4, and many thoughts arose as I contemplated the stained glass window, with its Suffering Servant Messenger King/Lord/Master, rainbow, Alpha, Omega, Noah's dove with the sprig of olive; and listened to the reading from Revelations 4; and sang "Be Thou My Vision" with the congregation; and considered what Epiphany the world needs at this time of intense war propaganda. There are those who declare themselves as Christian who claim that war with Iran is prophesied. This may be a fringe view, but the narrative infects major political discussion in the United States of America : "The problem, of course, is that rhetoric can have political effects that narrow the options available to decisionmakers. If you've publicly declared Iran's nuclear program sufficiently threatening to warrant initiating a potentially catastrophic war and then sanctions fail to achieve their defined goal, you may have a hard time walking back from that threat." ]

  • Energy Sovereignty for Iran

    Posted on January 11th, 2012 Jo No comments

    Here’s the prime time television where the U. S. Army chief admits that the American military know Iran is engineering at sea – although the General deliberately gets the purpose wrong.

    [For an uncorrected transcript of the piece, see below at the end of this post].

    He claims that Iran is going to use their engineering to shut the Strait of Hormuz, a major artery of oil transport from the Middle East to the world.

    Whereas, in actual fact, Iran has been constructing facilities to mine marine, sub-sea Natural Gas in its territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, and wants to use it to generate electricity to export.

    Iran is sitting on Natural Gas – a lot of Natural Gas. And a lot of it is at sea. There have been marine seismic surveys for sub-sea Natural Gas in the Persian Gulf over the last few years, and it seems, other countries have been spying on the Iranian offshore activities.

    Clearly, with Iran’s intent to exploit its marine gas, there have been and will be construction ships and construction going on in the Persian Gulf and around the Strait of Hormuz, especially the islands of Kish and Qeshm. This should not be mistaken as a risk to oil shipping. It should not be claimed as indications of Iran seeking to close the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for economic sanctions.

    What is at stake here is no less than Iran’s energy sovereignty – its sovereign right to enjoy the wealth from exploiting its own energy resources.

    The international pressure for an end to fossil fuel subsidies would hurt Iranian internal economic development (much like it’s hurting Nigeria, currently), and it would be forced to export oil and Natural Gas – no doubt at low market prices. Iran may end up no better off for trading.

    The Iranians bought myths about nuclear power hook, line and sinker, and they believe they have a right to develop civilian atomic energy. Other countries, the United States of America in particular, keep pushing this button and claiming that Iran is heading for developing nuclear weapon capability. This is the most unbelievable accusation since…oh, I don’t know, since the USA accused Iran of a plot for a used car salesman and a Mexican, or something, to kill a Saudi ambassador, which was unadulterated nonsense.

    America’s insistence that Iran is a threat because they claim that Iran is working towards constructing nuclear weapons, is so ridiculous, that few seem to have realised it is “deflection” – a propaganda technique to divert you from the real source of tension between the USA and Iran.

    What America really doesn’t seem to like is countries like Iran (and Venezuela) making autonomous energy decisions, and creating their own wealth by using their own energy resources in their own way.

    Maybe the American war hawks think “Why cannot Iran be more like Iraq, with western oil and Natural Gas companies with discount contracts, crawling over new resources and selling it all abroad ?”

    Anyway, what is clear is that the spat between Iran and the USA has nothing to do with nuclear power or idle brinkmanship about controlling the flow of oil as a retaliation against economic sanctions.




    NEWS BROADCAST TRANSCRIPT

    http://www.bloomberg.com/video/83880880/

    Bloomberg : 9 January 2012 : Lara Setrakian reports on the outlook for Iran to close the Strait of Hormuz as Europe prepares to follow tougher U. S. sanctions on the country over its nuclear program and the status of a pipeline that would allow oil from the United Arab Emirates to bypass the waterway. The pipeline has been delayed because of construction difficulties, two people with knowledge of the matter said. Setrakian speaks with Linzie Janis on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown.”

    [Ticker tape reads "AHMADINEJAD TURNS TO CHAVEZ FOR SUPPORT"]

    [Linzie Janis] “The Persian Gulf could be closed off to ships altogether, that’s if tensions continue to escalate between Iran and the West. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is due to meet with Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez later on today as part of a tour of Latin America. He is seeking s”upport” as Iran faces tighter U. S. sanctions over its nuclear program.

    [Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in translation] We will discuss the intentions of the arrogant system interfering and having a military presence in other countries. We shall coordinate with our friends in Latin America to address this matter.

    [Linzie Janis] Well with the very latest Lara Setrakian joins us with from Dubai

    Lara itell it looks like the U. S. and Iran could be on a – - collision course here.

    [Lara Setrakian] Well moving closer towards it, as Iran inches towards what the U. S. has called “two red lines” – advanced nuclear enrichment at the underground Fordow facility, and shutting the Strait of Hormuz – something that Iran told the A. P. [Associated Press] they’ll do if the E. U. oil embargo goes through later this month. The highest level U. S. assessment to date – that Iran could shut the Strait that would effectively trigger a military confrontation in the Persian Gulf.

    General Martin Dempsey, American Department of Defense, United States Army Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman] They’ve invested in capabilities that could [scratches nose - a classic sign of lying] in fact for a period of time block the Straits of Hormuz. We’ve invested in capabilities [rocking body slightly from side to side - a classic sign of swagger] to ensure that if that happens [giving a hard, fixed stare] we can, er, defeat that. [Looks down briefly - meaning that this information was a significant reveal] And so, the simple answer [shrugs shoulders to dimiss the concept] is yes, they can block it. Er… [ Looks down and to his right, our left, indicating a recall of something] And of course that is as well…[blinks to conceal the fact that he's cut something out] we’ve described that as an intolerable act [shrugs shoulders as if to say, those Iranians have got it coming to them] and it’s not just intolerable for us [shakes head from side to side] it’s intolerable to the world [rubs one hand over another, which is a sign of nervousness]. But we would take action and re-open the Straits [shuts lips in beefburger bun clench and nodding as a sign that no more useful information will be forthcoming].

    [ Ticker Tape reads : THREATS TO STRAIT OF HORMUZ SHIPPING ]

    [Lara Setrakian] Meanwhile it could disrupt the biggest sea lane for the world’s shipped oil, what one analyst called “the ultimate fear in the oil market – it would spike prices”.

    [Linzie Janis] So what kind of preparation are you seeing to counter that risk ?

    [Lara Setrakian] Well, one of the biggest contigency plans so far has floundered – a pipeline here in the U. A. E. that would run from Abu Dhabi to the Port of Fujairah. It would avoid the Strait. It’s a $3.3 billion dollar project but it’s been delayed – not ready until April at the soonest. And it’s meant to move 1.5 million barrels per day, most of Abu Dhabi’s output, say two days at sea, but the pipeline has been delayed repeatedly by construction issues – one energy analyst Robin Mills pointing also to a pipeline in Saudi Arabia that’s meant to be another backup system [ Ticker Tape reads "FURTHER CONTINGENCY PIPELINES PLANNED"] that could take oil to the Red Sea after 5 million barrels of oil a day capacity and it could be expanded – again, all contigency planning – to keep oil free from any Iranian chokehold in the Persian Gulf.

    Linzie.

    [Linzie Janis] Lara, thank you very much.

  • Open Letter to Renewable Energy Deniers

    Posted on January 10th, 2012 Jo 2 comments

    To all Renewable Energy Deniers,

    Things are getting so much better with renewable energy engineering and deployment – why do you continue to think it’s useless ?

    We admit that, at the start, energy conversion efficiencies were low, wind turbine noise was significant, kit was expensive. Not now. Wind and solar farms have been built, data collected and research published. Design modifications have improved performance.

    Modelling has helped integrate renewable energy into the grids. As renewable energy technologies have been deployed at scale, and improvements and adjustments have been made, and electricity grid networks have adapted to respond to the variable nature of the wind and the sunshine, we know, and we can show you, that renewable energy is working.

    It’s not really clear what motivates you to dismiss renewable energy. Maybe it’s because you’re instinctively opposed to anything that looks like it comes from an “envionmentalist” perspective.

    Maybe because renewable energy is mandated to mitigate against climate change, and you have a persistent view that climate change is a hoax. Why you mistrust the science on global warming when you accept the science on everything else is a continuing mystery to me.

    But if that’s where you’re coming from when you scorn developments in renewable energy, you’re making a vital mistake. You see, renewable energy is sustainable energy. Despite any collapse in the globalised economy, or disruption to fossil fuel production, wind turbines will keep spinning, and solar panels will keep glowing.

    Climate change has been hard to communicate effectively – it’s a huge volume of research, it frequently appears esoteric, or vague, or written by boffins with their heads in the clouds. Some very intelligent people are still not sure about the finer points of the effects of global warming, and so you’re keeping good company if you reserve judgement on some of the more fringe research.

    But attacking renewable energy is your final stand. With evidence from the engineering, it is rapidly becoming clear that renewable energy works. The facts are proving you wrong.

    And when people realise you’re wrong about renewable energy, they’ll never believe you again. They won’t listen to you when you express doubts about climate change, because you deny the facts of renewable energy.

    Those poor fools who have been duped into thinking they are acting on behalf of the environment to campaign against wind farms ! Wind energy will be part of the backbone of the energy grids of the future.

    We don’t want and we can’t afford the concrete bunkers of deadly radioactive kettles and their nasty waste. We don’t want and we can’t afford the slag heaps, dirty air and melting Arctic that comes from burning coal for power. We don’t want and we can’t afford to keep oil and Natural Gas producing countries sweet – or wage war against them to keep the taps open.

    Instead we want tall and graceful spinners, their gentle arms waving electricity from the breeze. We want silent and dark photovoltaic cladding on every roof.

    Burning things should only be done to cover for intermittency in wind and sunshine. Combustion is very inefficient, yet you support combustion when you oppose renewable energy.

    We must fight waste in energy, and the rising cost of energy, and yet you don’t support the energy resources where there is no charge for fuel. Some would say that’s curmudgeonly.

    When you oppose renewable energy, what is it you’re fighting for ? The old, inefficient and poisonous behemoths of coal hell ? We who support renewable, sustainable energy, we exchange clunky for sleek, toxic for clean. We provide light and comfort to all, rich and poor.

    When you oppose renewable energy, you are being unbelievably gullible – you have swallowed an argument that can ruin our economy, by locking us into dependency on energy imports. You are passing up the chance to break our political obedience to other countries, all because wind turbines clutter up your panoramic view when you’re on holiday.

    You can question the net energy gain from wind power, but the evidence shows you to be incorrect.

    If you criticise the amount of investment and subsidy going into renewable energy, you clearly haven’t understood the net effect of incentivisation in new technology deployment.

    Renewable energy has a positive Net Present Value. Wind turbines and solar panels are genuine assets, unlike the liabilities that are coal-fired power stations and nuclear reactors.

    Renewable energy deployment will create meaningful, sustainable employment and is already creating wealth, not only in financial terms, but in social welfare terms too.

    Renewable energy will save this country, so why do you knock it ?

    Quizzically yours,

  • 2012 : Greenier and Peace-ier

    Posted on January 1st, 2012 Jo No comments

    My dear family.

    They think I’m an environmentalist, a bit radical, a bit confrontational.

    So for a fun wintertime gift they bought me this lovely cloth tote(m) bag for grocery shopping.

    I think I might have failed to communicate myself clearly enough.

    Although I try to be frugal and efficient in my way of life, recycling is not my central agenda.

    I studied physics, but I don’t have a laboratory. The things that I believe need to be developed are technologies in the field of clean, green energy. I am an engineer without a workshop – although my home is now a power station.

    Recycling is important, but reducing the use of resource materials is far more important.

    Recycling is important, but energy waste is far more important. Digging things out of the ground and burning them in order to keep civilisation moving is the ultimate misuse of natural resources.

    Recycling is important, but so are international relations, especially around the sourcing of commodities such as fossil fuels, rare metals, timber and freshwater.

    The world needs to work together – to make friends, not invent enemies – even more so when those so-called opponents sit on vital energy resources.

    May you have a year that is greener and has more peace.

  • Advent Joy : Christmas Rose

    Posted on December 11th, 2011 Jo No comments
    Audete, Gaudete !
    Christus est natus
    Ex Maria Virgine,
    Gaudete !

    Tempus adest gratiae,
    Hoc quod optabamus;
    Carmina laetitiae,
    Devote reddamus.

    Deus homo factus est,
    Natura mirante;
    Mundus renovatus est
    A Christo regnante…

    Welcome, little Christmas rose, into a big and troubled world. We are so happy you’ve made your journey safely, we could sing heartily.

    The world is no closer to a binding, enactable accord on preventing catastrophic climate change, but at least the Durban United Nations conference is over, and many are therefore sleepily rejoicing.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • Cheering on the Occupation

    Posted on November 17th, 2011 Jo 3 comments
    I am deeply concerned about the ramping up in rhetoric about Iran’s imagined nuclear weapons programme. I say “imagined” because there is no evidence pointing towards Iran doing anything other than they say they are doing – following a civilian nuclear power programme.

    In fact, this bluster has nothing at all to do with the power of atoms, peaceful or otherwise. From my point of view, it’s all about controlling the price of fuel.

    Economic sanctions against Iran are being considered on the basis of the International Atomic Energy Agency report on Iran’s nuclear ambitions and activities, and this I would consider highly deceitful. The “international community” may well impose further trade embargoes on Iran, but the underlying reason for such action has nothing to do with nuclear suspicion. I believe that applying economic sanctions against Iran is all about forcing Iran to export more fossil fuel – principally Natural Gas – and to do so cheaply.

    In fact, there is a two-pronged assault on Iran’s energy sovereignty taking place – not only are economic sanctions already in place, there are calls from the highest top table for an end to fossil fuel subsidies. People have been cheering this on because at first glance it looks like a carbon control policy, but in reality it will lead to Western economic occupation of Iranian hydrocarbons – an occupation, it is hoped, to be accomplished without finding some excuse for a military intervention.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • Solar FIT to Bust #5

    Posted on November 15th, 2011 Jo No comments
    Germany can do it, but not the British. The Collected Republic of the People can install solar power with great will and nerve, but not Johnny English.

    Let’s be clear here – the people in Scotland have a vision for future Renewable Energy, and so do many people in Wales and Ireland, but it appears English governance listens to fuddy duddy landowners too readily, and remains wedded to the fossil fuel industry and major construction projects like nuclear power, and carbon capture and storage.

    What precisely is wrong with the heads of policy travel in Westminster ? Do they not understand the inevitable future of “conventional” energy – of decline, decimation and fall ?

    It really is of no use putting off investment in truly sustainable and renewable power and gas. There are only two paths we can take in the next few decades, and their destination is the same.

    Here’s how it goes. Path A will take the United Kingdom into continued dodgy skirmishes in the Middle East and North Africa. Oil production will dance like a man with a stubbed toe, but then show its true gradient of decline. Once everybody gets over the panic of the impending lack of vehicle fuel, and the failure of alternatives like algal biodiesel, and the impacts of a vastly contracted liquid fuel supply on globalised trade, then we shall move on to the second phase – the exploitation of gas. At first, it will be Natural Gas. But that too will decline. And then it will be truly natural gases. As gas is exploited for vehicles, electricity will have to come from coal. But coal, too, is suffering a precipitous decline. So renewable energy will be our salvation. By the year 2100, the world will run on renewable electricity and renewable gas, or not at all.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • Tavistock Square : Hiroshima Tree

    Posted on November 13th, 2011 Jo No comments
    I arrived at the end of the Peace Pledge Union remembrance gathering in Tavistock Square. I spoke with Professor Paul Gilroy of the London School of Economics. “All the war-mongering this year”, I complained, “I can’t stand it. The Libyan assaultit wasn’t even about Gaddafi.”

    He asked after my interests in peace, and I described my ambition for renewable energy. The only way we can have peace and security is to have distributed energy solutions : homegrown climate-protecting energy in each country.

    I paid my silent respects at the Conscientious Objectors Stone. White poppies placed on the memorial were blown to the ground by the humid breeze, and lay there, fallen, with the leaves. The fallen. Although it was unusually warm for the time of year, the day was quite grey, but punctured by hopeful, weak sunshine.

    I sat down on a park bench to meditate on the poems chosen for the day, facing the British Medical Association, recalling how its stone facade was sprayed with innocent and misguided human blood on the day of 7th July, 2005. I was sitting under the weavework of the Hiroshima tree.

    I saw a woman making her way towards the plaque under the tree. She was carrying a movie camera. I knew why she had come. She saw my white poppy, and realised I could answer her enquiry. “Is the peace meeting here at 2.30pm ?” I explained it had been at 12.30. I invited her to sit down on the bench next to me, so we could share.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • How Soon Is Now ?

    Posted on November 4th, 2011 Jo 1 comment

    With almost daily updates on the climate change and energy crises, it seems like we should convert all our power generation and fuel systems to renewable resources. As of yesterday.

    It would seem that sooner rather than later is the best timeframe for any adjustment and renovation of energy systems.

    The current debate in the United Kingdom about state subsidies to solar photovoltaic electricity generation systems is strongly focused on financial aspects, but really should be centred on pragmatism.

    Privatisation of electricity generation has resulted in decades of under-investment. Many power stations and grid components needs updating or replacing. This needs to be done soon, as the Regulator Ofgem has reported in their “Project Discovery”.

    With such a short time to renew electricity generation, it would seem wise to adopt both a top-down and bottom-up approach, by investing in a range of electricity production systems of all scales.

    Yet there is a remarkable intransigence in the power industry. Those players with the access to credit and the capital that have the capacity to invest in new installations are simply not budging.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • Occupy your mind #7

    Posted on October 27th, 2011 Jo No comments

    Image Credit : The Diocese of London

    So, after rumours and quashings of rumours, Giles Fraser has resigned as canon chancellor of St Paul’s Cathedral, “resigned in protest at plans to forcibly remove demonstrators from its steps, saying he could not support the possibility of “violence in the name of the church”…Fraser, a leading leftwing voice in the Church of England, would resign because he could not sanction the use of police or bailiffs against the hundreds of activists who have set up camp in the grounds of the cathedral in the last fortnight.”

    But just why did Giles Fraser resign ? What has it achieved ? What could it possibly achieve ? Now he’s no longer in the Cathedral organisation he cannot influence what happens. What pressures has he had to endure behind the scenes that gave him no option but to jump ?

    Somebody I know has been praying that there would be heavy rain in London, just so the conditions would be impossible for the Occupyer camp to continue; that they would have to pack up and go home.

    What on Earth is this @OccupyLSX protest for ? A camp of principle, to defend the right to protest ? A camp of demands, pursuing a just economics and a just society ? A camp of non-violence, when it deliberately provokes a stand-off between demonstrators and police forces ? How can the Occupyers claim to be peaceful when they know their actions have a fragmentation bomb-like effect on the society around them ? How can the Cathedral Campers evidence their intentions for a juster, saner, economic system, when the net effect of their actions is likely to be a huge law court struggle at taxpayer expense ? It’s not a revolution, it’s an irritation – or at least that is the way that it will continue to be viewed by the governing authorities.

    Somebody on the inside track of campaigning in London has told me that the Occupy protest is destined to transmogrify into a Climate Refugee tent city in late November, early December. If it survives that long, then at least it can claim to be a piece of living art reflecting what is happening around the world because of climate change disasters.

    Unless and until the Occupyers can take on relevance, everybody with even just a slightly-left-of-centre agenda will attempt to co-opt the Occupy London camp for their own purposes.

    Remember, dear Occupyers, you are not “rising up” like the people in Libya – they were supplied with arms from around the world, forces overt and covert from Qatar, Europe and quite possibly America, and fed into a huge psychological operations narrative, ably supported by the media.

    The Libyan conflict wasn’t about Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, may he rest in peace. The information management of the North African and Middle Eastern unrest shows that mass propaganda still works, and that media consumers continue to fall for the same fabrications, time after time.

  • The Problem of Powerlessness #2

    Posted on October 22nd, 2011 Jo No comments
    On Wednesday, I received a telephone call from an Information Technology recruitment consultancy. They wanted to know if I would be prepared to provide computer systems programming services for NATO.

    Detecting that I was speaking with a native French-speaker, I slipped into my rather unpracticed second language to explain that I could not countenance working with the militaries, because I disagree with their strategy of repeated aggression.

    I explained I was critical of the possibility that the air strikes in Libya were being conducted in order to establish an occupation of North Africa by Western forces, to protect oil and gas interests in the region. The recruitment agent agreed with me that the Americans were the driving force behind NATO, and that they were being too warlike.

    Whoops, there goes another great opportunity to make a huge pile of cash, contracting for warmongers ! Sometimes you just have to kiss a career goodbye. IT consultancy has many ethical pitfalls. Time to reinvent myself.

    I’ve been “back to school” for the second university degree, and now I’m supposed to submit myself to the “third degree” – go out and get me a job. The paucity of available positions due to the poor economic climate notwithstanding, the possibility of ending up in an unsuitable role fills me with dread. One of these days I might try to write about my experiences of having to endure several kinds of abuse whilst engaged in paid employment : suffice it to say, workplace inhumanity can be unbearable, some people don’t know what ethical behaviour means, and Human Resources departments always take sides, especially with vindictive, manipulative, micro-managers. I know what it’s like to be powerless.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • The Problem of Powerlessness

    Posted on October 21st, 2011 Jo 2 comments
    Yesterday, after months of being hounded, both literally and politically, an elderly statesman in North Africa was cornered, cowering in a concrete drain, and executed.

    Somebody, somewhere, in the global authority structure that we have, decided that he had to go, and pursued him through the world’s media channels, and armed his opponents, after arming his regime, provoking a civil war, with inevitable, almost scripted, results.

    Cast as a bad person, a mad person, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s views and opinions were made to have no value – he was as much a victim of propaganda as weaponry.

    The war hawks, the warmongers, the people who use violence to control us, and call it warfare – they’ve achieved their mission aims once more. They have their Christ. And they have their crucifixion. It’s like the massacre of Osama bin Laden all over again. And overall, the narrative was more cruci-fiction than cruci-fact.

    It’s not a War on Terror any more, it’s a War on Tenure. If you’re a national leader, anywhere in the world, who doesn’t do what the global expropriation community want you to do, well, then, you should expect to be drubbed, dissed, dismissed, debunked, ducked, and quite possibly murdered. The so-called West want to continue to have cheap commodities, cheap manufactured goods, low cost minerals and low cost energy, and if you block that agenda, you stand to lose a fight you didn’t start.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • War in the Media

    Posted on October 11th, 2011 Jo No comments
    Some people may wonder why this YouTube starts halfway through a panel discussion from the Rebellious Media Conference at the weekend.

    I certainly did. So I dug deep down in my appallingly scratchy notes and typed up a paraphrase of what Mark Curtis had said – the first speaker on the panel.

    Warning – it’s not verbatim – it is interpolated from my illegible handwriting.

    “War and the Media” : Panel Discussion : Rebellious Media Conference
    8 – 9 October 2011 : Mark Curtis, Greg Philo, John Pilger
    [Comments from Mark Curtis roughly reconstructed from jotted notes]

    [...Tests the audience's general knowledge about the world's longest serving dictators...] It’s “Our Man in Oman”, Sultan Qaboos bin Said Al-Said.

    We don’t hear much about Oman. Why is that ? Let’s make two assumptions, first, that journalists can read, and second that they are following government sources.

    For the UK Government, foreign policy is increasingly about oil. UK has been developing relationships with the Gulf States. There is a policy of deepening support for the most undemocratic states in the region.

    Britain continues to project military power. You can see this in a hundred years of UK foreign policy – just read a few speeches.

    This is not what we are being told in the media. Was this a war for oil ? Is the Pope a Catholic ?

    In the media, the view [expressed] is that Britain is about supporting democracy in the Middle East.

    This country has two special relationships. The special relationship with the United States [of America] is about consumerism and investment.

    The other special relationship is much less [publicly] known [communicated]. Saudi Arabia since 1973 [...]

    A problem – Saudi Arabia is funding radical Islam.

    And when Cameron [...] in Bahrain…I wonder what they were talking about ?

    When Britain provides arms, the media reports that it contradicts our policy of promoting democracy – to maintain them in power. We don’t have a policy of upholding democracy. They are our allies. We don’t want them to fall.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • Daniel Yergin : Revisionist Comb-Over

    Posted on October 4th, 2011 Jo 1 comment

    Image Credit : cache.daylife.com

    I don’t have anything against balding people. Anybody can start losing hair, and will most likely feel embarrassed about it and start doing silly things like combing strands over the patch – the classic comb-over : not a sign of vanity, more a sign of vulnerability. It’s a kind of disguise, not admitting to the facts, even as the facts become more and more apparent. The balding person does not accept what is happening, and is seeking to delay the inevitable.
    I’ve read the Introduction and Prologue (and a little of Chapter 1) of Daniel Yergin’s new book “The Quest : Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World”. I have found it very hard-going, and I keep having to pause. The reason ? I am far too critical of the writing, and it keeps making me some kind of cross between a tad narked and full-blown irritated.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • China Launches : Space Republic

    Posted on October 1st, 2011 Jo No comments

    China has launched Tiangong-1, the “Heavenly Palace“, and demonstrated an international co-operative republic of space in the making. Many technologists, scientists, engineers and military personnel in the major economies will have taken part in the coordination of this project.

    Three things come to mind. First of all, China are going to experience a massive drain on domestic economic and social development in pursuit of its programme to set up a space station. Some could say this is deliberate, and that China has been convinced to spend on space to keep them from world economic dominance.

    Next, the Chinese are obviously going to set up Earth monitoring systems, and are going to find out that everything the Americans have said about environment and climate, based on the data from the NASA, NOAA and UAH satellites and space occupation, is accurate; and wonder why they were convinced of the possibility of the alternative, and the necessity of going up there to find out for themselves.

    And thirdly, the Chinese are going to find that they are drawn into the American and United Nations economic and military security programmes, monitoring common “enemies” – such as those breaking carbon treaties and constructing disallowed nuclear power stations.

    So, not a space republic – not even a space race. More, a space replication, repeating what’s already been done before. A giant public works project that should keep the hardworking Chinese people proud for a moment.

    Happy Birthday, China !

  • Natural Gaza (4)

    Posted on July 8th, 2011 Jo No comments

    What’s wrong with this map ? Yes, the same old question. And the answer is again the same – the lack of geographical accuracy in the map reflects the lack of legal accuracy on the part of Israel in appropriating marine Natural Gas that belongs to the Palestinian Gaza Strip.

    The map is taken from a new research paper by Brenda Shaffer, of the School of Political Sciences at the University of Haifa, which has been accepted for publication in Energy Policy at some point in the near future :-

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421511004113
    “Energy Policy : Article in Press, Corrected Proof : doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2011.05.026 : Israel – New natural gas producer in the Mediterranean : Brenda Shaffer : Received 7 November 2010; accepted 16 May 2011. Available online 2 June 2011″

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • Venezuela : The New Frenemy

    Posted on July 1st, 2011 Jo No comments

    What if Venezuela is America’s new “frenemy” – the oil-producing trading friend that the United States just loves to hate ? They might not have an appetite or budget for military intervention, but considering the fossil fuel resources locked away under Venezuelan soil and sea, they might just be pleased at a change in the regime – and only one person would need to be removed to make that happen…

    Since the economic sanctions were imposed on Venezuela by the USA, for trading with Iran, several very interesting events have transpired, several of them on the same day, 8 June 2011.

    Read the rest of this entry »

  • Flashback 2008 : Who Pays for the Re-Powering ?

    Posted on June 26th, 2011 Jo No comments

    2nd November 2008

    Browsing at a newsagent on a mainline railway station…

    The question on the front cover of Fortune magazine, Europe edition Number 20, November 2008, already on the stands is “Who Pays for The Bailout ? You do, of course”. Of course, as this Credit Crunch means Bailout argument plays out, the issue of Energy and Climate Change is lost. But the question should be all about how to create a new green economy. Who pays for the re-powering ?

    A sign of the greening times – another story teaser on the Fortune magazine advises “10 Green Stocks to Own Now”, and the front of the Independent on Sunday quotes Obama claiming that Energy is his “number one priority” in his bid for presidential election, with his “Apollo” project :-

    “Obama’s green jobs revolution : Democrat will lead effort to curb world’s dependence on oil; Plans to create five million new posts in clean energy projects : By Geoffrey Lean in San Francisco and Leonard Doyle in Washington : Sunday, 2 November 2008 : Obama has pledged to create five million new ‘green collar jobs’ if elected : Barack Obama is promising a $150 billion “Apollo project” to bring jobs and energy security to the US through a new alternative energy economy, if his final push for votes brings victory in the presidential election on Tuesday. “That’s going to be my number one priority when I get into office,” Mr Obama has said of his “green recovery” plans. Making his arguments in a radio address yesterday, the Democratic favourite promised: “If you give me your vote on Tuesday, we won’t just win this election. Together, we will change this country and change the world.”…”

    Meanwhile…Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband (and Peter Mandelson) get off the plane in Saudi and beg for investment into green energy in the UK :-

    “Gulf petrodollars help UK go green : Brown calls for Saudis to give more cash to IMF : Gaby Hinsliff, political editor : The Observer, Sunday 2 November 2008 : The fight against climate change will get an unexpected boost today from oil-rich Gulf states which will pledge to invest some of their petrodollar profits in British green energy projects. The surging oil price over the past year has left parts of the Middle East awash with cash as the rest of the world is squeezed by the credit crunch, making Arab royals some of the few active investors worldwide. The Gulf states have enjoyed a $1.4 trillion windfall from higher oil prices since 2003. Ed Miliband, the Climate Change Secretary, arrived in Saudi Arabia yesterday with Gordon Brown at the start of a tour of the region. He said some of that cash would now ‘help our firms reap the rewards from going low carbon and providing green energy to thousands of families’ under a so-called ‘green Gulf deal’ to be announced today…”

    But that’s not the real reason why they are there. Ostensibly, the delegation’s serious business is about asking Saudi and other Arab oil states to contribute more towards the International Monetary Fund :-

    “Gordon Brown in the Middle East : Brown hopeful of Saudi cash for IMF : Allegra Stratton in Riyadh, guardian.co.uk, Sunday 2 November 2008 15.30 GMT : Gordon Brown said today he was hopeful of success in his attempts to persuade dollar-rich Gulf states to prop up ailing national economies through a massive injection of capital into the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The prime minister spent three hours in one-to-one talks with Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah, trying to persuade the monarch to invest in a revamped IMF. On the first leg of a four-day visit to the Middle East, and aiming to secure hundreds of billions of dollars for the fund, Brown called off a planned dinner with business leaders accompanying him so as to allow maximum negotiating time with the Saudi king. The IMF currently has around $250 billion in its emergency reserves but there are fears that, with Hungary, Iceland and Ukraine having already sought assistance and more nations expected to follow, the sum might not be sufficient. Brown hopes to persuade Gulf leaders to use some of the estimated $1 trillion they have made from high oil prices in the last few years to boost the reserves, indicating that he would like to see the current sum increased by “hundreds of billions” of dollars. The prime minister said following the talks that he was hopeful of having secured Saudi backing…”

    But hang on, what’s this ? :-

    “…Brown, who is accompanied by a high-level trade delegation seeking Gulf investment, including the CEOs of BP and Shell…”

    What on earth are BP (formerly British Petroleum) and (Royal Dutch) Shell doing in a delegation to the Arab states begging for the IMF charity fund and green energy investment ? Is it that BP and Shell won’t pay for green energy and it’s too hard to ask the British people to pay extra tax, so they’re coming to the Arab countries for a green energy bail-in ? What is going on here ? If OPEC countries are all in the “Axis of Evil”, and no foreign oil and gas companies can get a toehold, why are BP and Shell in the government delegation to Saudi ?

    Paying for new energy systems can be expensive. The European Union Emisssions Trading Scheme is saying they want 100% of carbon emissions auctioned by 2013 to pay for larger projects – Carbon Capture and Storage and new Nuclear Power. However, the costly deadweight “white elephant in the room” is not nuclear power, but dead wells.

    Are they all talking about Peak Oil in the OPEC Gulf, and proposing business opportunities to the King of the House of Saud to offset the Middle East’s future total loss of business as the wells empty – offering them compensation in the form of green investment deals ? Asking the Saudis to join the green energy race now and get ahead ?

    BP and Shell have benefited from the recent rise in the price of oil, profiting even as the oil price has hit millions and created impoverishment. But they’re going to have to spend a very large amount on exploration for new oil and gas from now on. So why is there still resistance to spending more on renewables ? Can BP and Shell ever be convinced to go green ? Would a barrel load of toxic news work ? No. BP and Shell can’t pay for green energy because they have to maintain the profits of their shareholders. Pensions are going to be bad enough without forcing major “British” oil companies to pay for such things as bioethanol, algae biodiesel, solar panels and wind farms.

    Action to tackle climate change must be a “tight shadow” on Peak Oil and its fall – tighter than the 9.1% depletion of the largest wells projected by the International Energy Agency (IEA) To reverse the oil decline, and more so to take action on climate change, investment is required. Banks are becoming owned by oil-rich nations, but this is simply a natural outcome of poor financial regulation that led to the Credit Crunch. However, it doesn’t mean that the future will be oil and gas necessarily. This new layer of ownership of financial bodies is not significant, as it will not seriously impact the greening of energy, if people are serious about it.

    What is of value here is not banking but energy itself, which underpins the entire economy. The scenario is this : Saudi Arabia will not admit in public that it’s going down because of “Peak Oil”. They would prefer to keep up the revenue, but they’re not “engineering” a reduction of supply. It’s reducing anyway.

    From their perspective, allowing supplies to weaken, by not doing any new investment into raising production, would be protecting their reserves to sell in future. A good strategy – even more so as prices rise against losses of supply but strong demand (even despite the blooming recession).

    I figure that what BP and Shell are doing in the Middle East is making the case to the major oil-producing states to keep on pumping.

    I guess that what Gordon Brown is doing is making the Saudis an offer they can’t refuse – either the major western states will implement measures to control oil prices which would make OPEC lose revenue, or the Saudis can underwrite the global bailout.

    This mission is not about green energy investment. It’s about keeping the oil flowing.

  • Selling Thorium to China

    Posted on June 24th, 2011 Jo 6 comments

    Kirk Sorensen, formerly of Teledyne Brown Engineering, now of Flibe Energy

    To: Claverton Energy Research Group
    From: Jo Abbess
    Date: 24 June 2011
    Subject: “Don’t believe the spin on thorium being a ‘greener’ nuclear option”‏

    Hi Clavertonians,

    As you are, I’m sure, aware, context is everything.

    I was so sure we’d escaped the clutches of the “Thorium Activist Trolls” a few years ago, but no, here they are in resurgence again, and this time they’ve sucked in George Monbiot, Mark Lynas and Stephen Tinsdale, all apparently gullible enough to believe the newly resurrected Generation IV hype campaign.

    They should have first done their research on the old Gen IV hype campaign that withered alongside the “Hemp will Save the World, No Really” campaign and the “Biodiesel will Save the World, AND You Can Make it at Home” brigade. Oh, and the Zero Point Energy people.

    I was, I admit, quite encouraged by both the Hemp and Biodiesel drives, until I realised they were a deliberate distraction from the Big Picture – how to cope with the necessity of creating an integrated system of truly sustainable energy for the future.

    Hemp and Biodiesel became Internet virally transmitted memes around the same time as the Thorium concept, but where did they come from ?

    Where does the Thorium meme originate from this time round ? I found some people took to it at The Register, where they spin against Climate Change science a lot – watch the clipped video :-

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/01/china_thorium_bet/

    I would suggest that there are connections between the Thorium campaign and the anti-Climate Change science campaign, and I have some evidence, but I’m too busy to research more in-depth just now, so I’m not going to write it all up yet.

    The key issues with all energy options is TIME TO DELIVERY and SCALEABILITY, and I think the option presented by the Thorium fuel cycle fails on both counts.

    Yeah, sure, some rich people can devote their life savings to it, and some Departments of Defense (yes, Americans) and their corporate hangers-on can try selling ANOTHER dud technology to China (which is the basis of some Internet energy memes in my view).

    Remember Carbon Capture and Storage ? The British Government were very keen on making a Big Thing about CCS – in order to sell it to the miscreant Chinese because (WARNING : CHINA MYTH) China builds 2 !! coal-fired !! power stations a week/day/month !!

    THORIUM – A Brief Analysis
    TIME TO DELIVERY – 20 to 50 years
    SCALEABILITY – unknown
    USEFULNESS ASSESSMENT – virtually zero, although it could keep some people on the gravy train, and suck in some Chinese dough

    The Tyndall Centre say that global emissions of greenhouse gases have to peak AT THE LATEST by 2020. We should be thinking about rolling out the technology WE ALREADY HAVE to meet that end.

    Don’t believe the hype,

    jo.

    PS What other evidence do we have that the Thorium meme is most likely just a propaganda campaign ? Nick Griffin of the British National Party backs it, and the BNP are widely alleged to promote divisiveness…

  • Steve McIntyre : Plan Beak

    Posted on June 21st, 2011 Jo 2 comments

    [ UPDATE : SKEPTICALSCIENCE HAVE DEBUNKED STEVE McINTYRE. ]

    Steve McIntyre, probably the only person on the planet who might grumble about the cost of Barack Obama’s suit rather than his all-American wars, has suddenly become an expert energy engineer, it seems.

    This month, he’s taking aim at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, regarding their special report on Renewable Energy, questioning the contributions of an engineer, Sven Teske, and basing his objections on the fact that Teske works for Greenpeace :-

    http://climateaudit.org/2011/06/14/ipcc-wg3-and-the-greenpeace-karaoke/
    http://climateaudit.org/2011/06/16/responses-from-ipcc-srren/
    http://climateaudit.org/2011/06/18/lynas-questions/
    http://climateaudit.org/2011/06/20/the-carbon-brief-a-first-coat-of-whitewash/

    Flinging any kind of pseudo-mud he can construe at the IPCC is not Steve’s newest of tricks, but it still seems to be effective, going by the dance of the close cohort of the very few remaining loyal climate change “sceptics” who get published in widely-read media :-

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/18/lynas_greenpeace_ipcc_money_go_round/
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/18/lynas_greenpeace_ipcc_money_go_round/page2.html
    http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/Lost+desmog/4968296/story.html
    http://thegwpf.org/the-climate-record/3231-ipcc-used-greenpeace-campaigner-to-write-impartial-report-on-renewable-energy.html
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100092809/greenpeace-and-the-ipcc-time-surely-for-a-climate-masada/

    He even pulled the turtleneck over Andrew Revkin’s eyes for a while :-
    http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/a-deeper-look-at-an-energy-analysis-raises-big-questions/

    And Mark Lynas has been joining in, in his own nit-picky way :-
    http://www.marklynas.org/2011/06/new-ipcc-error-renewables-report-conclusion-was-dictated-by-greenpeace/
    http://www.marklynas.org/2011/06/questions-the-ipcc-must-now-urgently-answer/
    http://www.marklynas.org/2011/06/new-allegation-of-ipcc-renewables-report-bias/
    http://www.marklynas.org/2011/06/the-ipcc-renewables-controversy-where-have-we-got-to/

    The few comebacks have been bordering on the satirical, or briefly factual, with the exception of Carbon Brief’s very measured analysis of the IPCC’s communication expertise :-
    http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2011/06/the-ipcc-and-the-srren-report
    http://www.jeremyleggett.net/2011/06/mark-lynas-questions-hether-greenpeace-expert-should-be-an-ipcc-author/
    http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/06/16/246665/ipcc-renewables-2/

    Leo Hickman’s being bravely evenhanded :-
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/jun/21/peace-talks-climate-change-sceptics

    It’s not a total surprise that New Scientist and The Economist wade in deep :-
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20583-conflict-of-interest-claimed-for-ipcc-energy-report.html
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/06/ipcc-and-greenpeace

    Sven Teske’s explanation has not been accepted by Mark Lynas, although it seems really OK to me :-
    http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/climate/the-ipccs-renewables-report-finds-a-clean-ene/blog/35322

    The Daily Mail digs out the usual emotive terms :-
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004440/Leading-climate-change-group-used-Greenpeace-campaigner-write-impartial-report-renewable-energy.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

    Steve McIntyre is playing out the “Princess and the Pea” narrative, complaining about a few wrunkles in a process of international collaboration, and distracting us from looking at the actual report, which I would encourage you most warmly to do :-

    http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/
    http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/report

    It is full of the most incredible case studies and intriguing engineering discoveries. It makes cautious, conservative calculations, and looks at conditions and caveats in a very transparent manner. For a work that relied on the contributions of over 120 people and managed to compose a document so helpful and illuminating, I’d say it’s a work of profound achievement, and should be read in every school and university. Four scenarios from a collection of 164 are studied in depth to compare their strengths and weaknesses – and the conclusion of the SRREN team is that :-

    http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/press/content/potential-of-renewable-energy-outlined-report-by-the-intergovernmental-panel-on-climate-change

    “Close to 80 percent of the world‘s energy supply could be met by renewables by mid-century if backed by the right enabling public policies…”

    Somehow, though, Steve McIntyre believes otherwise. I suppose it’s not completely fair to berate him, because he might be suffering from a delusion, given that he seems to believe his opinion trumps that of over a hundred of the world’s authorities on what is possible in Renewable Energy technologies; and I’m the last person who would criticise somebody for having a mental illness.

    I’m wondering, however, since he often sticks his nose up at IPCC matters, and since the world is suffering from stress in the supply of fossil fuels, whether he has a “Plan Beak” for the world’s energy crisis ?

    Come on Steve McIntyre, tell us what your plan is to provide energy for humanity. Don’t tell me you believe that Nuclear Power is the way forward. I just won’t believe you, and a large number of the citizens of the UK, France, Germany, Japan, Italy and help us all, even Switzerland, would share my doubts.

    As everybody can clearly see from the Columbia University graph at the top of this post, the IPCC are right about emissions, and the global warming data shows they’re right about that too. Why should they be wrong about Renewable Energy ?

    I mean, I detect there are a few issues with the way the IPCC organises itself, and the style of its reports, but hey, where’s the viable alternative ? I don’t see one, anywhere. And don’t go pointing me to groups with pretensions.

    We may just have to get used to complex international bodies, formed of complex, intelligent people, and learn how to read their complex, intricate reports with care and attention. And not get distracted by grumpy semi-retired mining consultants.

  • A Green Van for all the People

    Posted on June 20th, 2011 Jo No comments

    Green Jobs ! Green Energy !

  • Energy for Democracy

    Posted on June 20th, 2011 Jo No comments

    Dropping The Campaign Wrecking Ball

    Intelligent commentators, authors and policy people are often suspicious of campaign groups. At the back of their minds they are drawing on a cultural discourse, primarily conducted in the media, that equates campaigners with mini-Hitlers – spreading disinformation and cult behaviour.

    It is true that – as Mein Kampf reveals – the National Socialists in Germany used the latest communications tools to coerce and channel the energy of democracy towards their goals.

    Some of the Nazi ambition was for democratic engagement, involvement in the process of rebuilding the country. Yet some of the methods were perverse, and caused an inexorable descent into the abuse of power.


    When people like Mark Lynas accuse Greenpeace and other green campaign organisations of failings, there is any underlying theme – accusations of manipulation – both of facts and people. The sub-text harks back to the combat against fascism and Nazism in Europe.

    We’re never going to make any progress on climate change if those advocating for energy change are equated to early 20th Century dictators and totalitarians.

    Energy is a Social Good

    I recently wrote an essay called “Energy for Democracy” making a first attempt at connecting the dots on grassroots democratic mobilisation and energy change. The subject set was in the field of “Environmental Communication”, and so I went back and looked at the development of mass media, advertising and public persuasion. I then went on to think about how propaganda and governance are interrelated. And I also looked at philosophy, and politics. I looked at the early 20th Century ideological splits in Europe, and the part that industrial development played. I looked at how democratic and other forms of socialism dealt with the problem of energy.

    I posited that, since energy is produced for the Common Good, it should be subject to democratic management. I found myself “channelling” the spirit of Ramsay Macdonald, and going back to the questions of society and the integration of new industries that were pervasive before the two so-called “World Wars”.

    Energy Of A Similar Wavelength

    And today I find this very theme picked up by Ulrich Beck in The Guardian newspaper, along with the expression “energy change”, which is a term I am using increasingly to encapsulate the pivotal and essential response to climate change :-

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/20/germany-nuclear-power-renewable-energy

    “Germany is right to opt out of nuclear”, he headlines, “The rejection of nuclear power is a result not of German angst but of economic thinking. We must invest in renewable energy”.

    I was gladdened when he stepped from economics to democratics :-

    “…Ultimately, the rejection of nuclear is not a result of German angst but of economic thinking. In the long run, nuclear power will become more expensive, while renewable energy will become cheaper. But the key point is that those who continue to leave all options open will not invest…People everywhere are proclaiming and mourning the death of politics. Paradoxically, the cultural perception of the danger may well usher in the very opposite: the end of the end of politics…what is denounced by many as a hysterical over-reaction to the “risks” of nuclear energy is in fact a vital step towards ensuring that a turning point in energy generation becomes a step towards greater democracy…The novel coalition between the state and social movements of the kind we currently see at work in Germany now has a historic opportunity. Even in terms of power politics, this change of policy makes sense…”

    The British are stumbling towards democracy, too, but they keep tripping over old divisiveness, and create new divisions too, just to complicate matters.

    People Power – Not Potty Nor Puny

    The Climate Camp has just been a baby step on the pathway to democratic movement on energy. Camping in coal trucks and dropping banners from power station cooling stacks has been a sign that democracy has been ailing – if there were genuine engagement between the governments, private enterprises and “campaign” groups over the future scenarios for energy, then people wouldn’t need to camp outside banks and coal-fired power plants.

    As a consumer of mainstream media, all you see is the blockade of a Biofuel refinery, or people gluing themselves to the entrance of the Royal Bank of Scotland, or the occupation of a plant nursery at the site of a proposed runway. If you think “what a ramshackle bunch of unwashed hippies, straining the last of their voices, railing at the State, in a vain attempt to roll back the tide of industry, progress and Thorium reactors”, then you haven’t understood the bigger picture.

    People want to be engaged in the decisions made about energy in this country – properly engaged. People want to use their knowledge to influence decisions. If the only means they have of expressing their democratic will and their opposition to hydraulic fracturing is to D-lock themselves to Shale Gas drilling equipment, then perhaps they might just do that. This might happen in Poland too. The alternative would be a proper discussion between the people groups and the governments. Where’s the European Union environmental legislature while all of this is happening ? Shale Gas could destroy Poland.

    Energy Collectives – Expressing Collective Democratic Will

    Groups like Fair Pensions are building momentum between people groups and investing institutions – raising the flag for clean energy. This isn’t about fighting – let’s drop the battlefield language, including that word “campaign”, which is so often used in a derogatory, dismissive, belittling way. This is about getting people working together on a new, sustainable future, and it requires all the righteous anger rising up to be channelled into a positive, productive movement, fully expressing the will of the people.

    Consultations and placard-waving demonstration protests are not the way forward – we need energy change, and that’s going to require a whole lot more democratic energy. People don’t want dirty energy, and they don’t want nuclear power. Dirty energy should be asked to leave the building, nicely, politely. Firm but fair.

    Group Thinking – Democratic Intelligence

    Investment in renewable and sustainable energy is creating long-lasting assets for the UK and other countries. We don’t need and we don’t want dirty, radioactive energy any more. A thousand cheers for German democracy !