Thursday, 25 February 2010

Whither/Wither Heathrow?

The Conservatives' position is clear
The LibDems' position is clear
The position of many in the Labour party is clear

Whatever the outcome of the impending General Election, Heathrow runway 3 will not be built.

This does, however, beg the question of how the demand for extra capacity (the estimated 222,000 extra flights which would have come with the third runway) will be met.

It is generally accepted that Heathrow “just growed”; starting from scratch it would not be there.

The problems with pollution, traffic congestion and noise with the current volume of flights at Heathrow
are apparent. These problems will be exacerbated by the more intensive use of the existing runways by improved air traffic control which will enable overlapped landing/take-off.
CO2 emissions may be reduced by new engine (open rotor) technology; however, this is noisier - it is highly probable that new generation planes with these engines could not operate from Heathrow

There is another elephant in the room: the issue of security/terrorism issue.
Consider: the ease with which the entry tunnels could be sabotaged, the appalling possibility of another 9/11 style attack on central London or Windsor – targets which could be hit only a few minutes after takeoff.

Let's call the whole thing off; close Heathrow entirely.

The Manifesto should advocate, if not enunciate, an holistic approach to the entire transport infrastructure of SE England.
The estuary airport as proposed by Boris could also encompass:
- TGV-style rail connections to UK & the continent
- the new Thames Barrier (needed in any case in consequence of climate change)
- tidal (therefore green) power generation
- wind power
- container port linked to rail for freight

This phased development would facilitate the re-development of the Heathrow area as:
- London's major rail centre linking Great Western, SouthWest Trains, Chiltern Rail, Chunnel
- rail freight interchange
- an exhibition & entertainment centre to rival to NEC
(this would also allow the redevelopment of the out-dated sites at Olympia and Earls Court)
- associated property/leisure development

Tuesday, 23 February 2010

AAAS San Diego #1: Improvised Asymmetry

IED versus IBD versus ICD

- to be expanded

Comment on The Times web site

A view from San Diego: more to come on: SD, Tijuana, AAAS - Climate Change, Geoengineering

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article7038528.ece

Time to crank up the Bank’s printer

If the economy relapses, jobs may be cut, reducing spare capacity, so the Bank should start easing as soon as possible


Richard Tebboth wrote:
MK's Quantitative Easing policy (sounds like a laxative) seems to have served principally to have boosted banks' profits and the bankers' bonuses.
If he just sent every taxpayer a cheque for £1000 (if not £10,000) it would provide a much greater boost to the economy and cut out the middlemen.
February 24, 2010 5:07 AM GMT

Thursday, 28 January 2010

Canaan Contemplation - Gazan Gaze - Palestine Perspective: Part 1

As a child in the 1950s, at Church, School, and Sunday School I was brought up on the stories of the Old Testament.

As a teenager, as part of the O Level history syllabus I learned of the Dreyfus Affair, the decline of the Ottoman Empire (as one of the causes of WW1) and the Balfour Declaration and associated treaties and concordats. (1)

In the 60s and 70s I first watched the movie epics:-
Exodus, Cast a Giant Shadow, Fiddler on the Roof, Lawrence of Arabia.

In 1967 I visited the Dachau concentration camp near Munich.

In September 1970 we witnessed the hijacking of four passenger jets by members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

In September 1972 we witnessed the massacre of 11 Israeli athletes at the Olympic Games in Munich by the Palestinian “Black September Organization”.

In February 1973 I visited Anglo-Jewish friends in Tel Aviv and went to the Wailing/Western Wall, Temple Mount and the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Jerusalem. (2)

Since 1982 I have been regularly reminded of the history of King Solomon's Temple and (since 1992) of the construction of the second temple.

In 1984 we visited the remains of the Warsaw ghetto and Auschwitz.

1993: Schindler's List - the movie

In 1994 we (in the company of Jewish friends) visited the Forêt de Compiègne: site of the formal German surrender in 1918; also the point of departure of the last deportation train of Jews from France to Auschwitz in 1944.

In 1996 on a visit to Prague we saw the remains of its ghetto and learned of the Golem; we also visited the Theresienstadt concentration camp. (3)

In 2001 I visited the Holocaust exhibition at the Imperial War Museum.

In 2007 I visited the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles with another Jewish friend.

27th January 2010 was Holocaust Memorial Day: the 65th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.

On 31st January 2010 we revisited the IWM Holocaust exhibition: the stories of the Lodz and Warsaw ghettos were amply illustrated; camp survivors provided their testimonies with accounts of racial and religious prejudice and pleas that this history wouldlead to tolerance and understanding.

All of the above dispose me to a natural sympathy with the Jewish people.

However...

In early December 2008 we visited Jordan and Petra; in the distance we heard an occasional distant rumble. On enquiry, our guide told me that this was a sonic boom caused by Israeli fighter jets breaking the sound barrier over the Gaza strip.

Three weeks later Israel initiated Operation Cast Lead with air-strikes on the Gaza Strip followed by a ground invasion beginning on 3 January 2009. The war ended on January 18 with Israel completed its withdrawal on January 21. Between 1,166 and 1,417 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed. For more detailed reports and analysis see below (4).

However... there was clear evidence of the use of phosphorus munitions; the “settler” movement has continued unabated.

[1st February 2010: "Israel has revealed it has disciplined two top army officers for using white phosphorus shells during an attack on a UN compound in Gaza last year."]

In January 2009 I had the pleasure of meeting Commander David Hawksley (RN retired) who was present at the end of the British Mandate of Palestine. His view from 1948:-
“Despite the efforts of Britain to provide balance, the world was trying to correct the great wrong done to the Jews in Europe by committing another great wrong, the dispossession of the Arabs of Palestine. Despite the subsequent admirable courage of the Israelis and the unattractive behaviour of Palestinian extremists, I still feel the same. This is simply a sense of practical justice.
The injustice will continue to be the cause of Middle East instability and a volatile fuel for terrorism until it is understood both by Israel and the US. In practical terms it requires the maximum effort by Israel to put it right as far as possible within the bounds of its own prosperity, which would probably improve as a result.”
I was therefore sensitised to the “Palestinian Issue” and have subsequently monitored events via the Internet getting daily reports from both Israel and Arab sources.
Most recently my interest culminated in my participation in the Viva Palestinia 3 convoy which took medical and educational materials to Gaza via the Rafah crossing point from Egypt.

Questions:-
1. Is Gaza a ghetto?
2. Who is now exhibiting racial and religious prejudice?

-to be continued

(1) References

1)The Sykes-Picot Agreement: 1916
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/sykes.asp

2)Balfour Declaration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917#Text_of_the_declaration
Foreign Office,
November 2nd, 1917.
Dear Lord Rothschild,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country".
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
Yours sincerely, Arthur James Balfour

3)Churchill:summary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churchill_White_Paper,_1922

4)Churchill:detail http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/brwh1922.asp

5)League of Nations Mandate http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp


(2) Less than 12 hours before my flight home Israeli jets shot down Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114 over the [then Israeli-occupied] Sinai peninsula.
http://world.mediamonitors.net/Headlines/Forgotten-History-The-Case-of-Libyan-Arab-Airlines-Flight-114

(3) Theresienstadt was also the place of imprisonment of Gavrilo Princip, the assassin of Archduke Francis Ferdinand in Sarajevo in June 1914 – the act which precipitated WW1; being only 19 at the time of the assassination he was sentenced to 20 years, held in solitary confinement in a dank cell, and died there of tuberculosis exacerbated by malnutrition and blood loss from an amputated arm in April 1918.

(4) URLs:
Britain-Palestine All Party Parliamentary Group
http://www.richardburden.com/uploads/1bb85b99-db9e-6124-3da0-ca8ee2120c27.pdf
Goldstone Report
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-48.pdf
Oxfam
http://www.oxfam.org.uk/oxfam_in_action/emergencies/gaza_crisis.html
Amnesty
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/israel039s-gaza-blockade-continues-suffocate-daily-life-20100118
Red Cross
http://www.redcross.org.uk/news.asp?id=89867

Wednesday, 18 November 2009

Climate Change: the View from IMechE in Woking

Woking uniquely features a large statue of a Martian.

The logic for this is implicit below.

On 17th November the IMechE hosted a meeting: Question Time: Global Challenges.
This was held in the HG Wells Conference Centre
The agenda and participants are given below.

The premise was that climate change is happening, is anthropogenic, and local actions such as those already underway in Woking provide an,if not the, answer.

However - my question:-
The latest statistics published by the International Energy Agency show that from 1990 to 2007 worldwide CO2 emissions increased by 38%.
They further forecast that worldwide burning of fossil fuels will continue to increase and by 2050 will be double that of 1990.
How can whatever Woking (and by extension the UK) have any real impact?

The IMechE has recently published a report pointing out the improbabilty of the UK achieving the "legally binding" CO2 reductions targetted for 2020 and 2050 by the current (past sell-by-date) government.
http://www.imeche.org/NR/rdonlyres/77CDE5E4-CE41-4F2C-A706-A630569EE486/0/IMechE_MAG_Report.PDF
This offers an excellent practical approach to the (perceived?) threat.
The UK government's reaction has been unenthusiastic.

Whilst some consider it heretical to raise the question...
Extract from letter in The Economist October 31st 2009 from Horst-Joachim Luedecke, Retired physics professor:-
"The IPCC .. 2001 report concluded that there was no discernable increase in storms, hurricanes, floods or droughts."
"sea levels .. a natural increase of 1-2mm a year has been occuring for many centuries. However, over the past few decades no anthropogenic signal in sea-level changes has been detected. This is firmly backed up by precise satellite altrimetry."

A "War of the Words" if not a "War of the Worlds"

Agenda as published by IMEchE

Binding targets on greenhouse gas emissions for the UK have now been set by the Government following the advice of the Committee on Climate Change. The IMechE believes these targets to be very challenging and that achieving them cannot help but strike a balance between mitigation (reducing emissions) and geo-engineering (artificially intervening to try and reduce the Earth’s temperature). Even allowing for success, there will also be a need for Woking to adapt to a warmer world and the drier, yet more stormy climate that will come from the emissions already in the atmosphere.

This QT intends to highlight a number of issues for Woking in the next forty years. It will focus on the extent to which solutions lie within Woking itself and to what extent Woking will continue to rely on outsiders for the essentials of life and treatment of its wastes. How much will it become a "sustainable community"? It will aim to bring the issues down to the individual family level and hence start to drive the personal behavioural changes at the heart of any delivery of any low carbon agenda.

The debate will be chaired by the President of the Institution, Keith H Millard FIMechE.

Panellists

John Thorp - Chief Operating Officer of Woking Borough Council
Woking has a population approaching 100,000 which is expanding by around 3% per year. Its industry is only 10% manufacturing and 8% transport. It has a public Climate Change Strategy but how can it contribute to 80% reductions in emissions when it has such a residential profile?

Miriam Kennet – CEO of the Green Economics Institute
The Green Economics Institute exists to promote "social and environmental justice". It aims to find solutions that "will bring long term and real prosperity to people, nature and the planet and its systems". How can it create this "everyone wins" solution and how does it balance the needs of people in Woking with those in Warsaw or Walajabad?

Jim Skea – Member of the Committee on Climate Change
The Committee on Climate Change is an independent body set up to advise Government on carbon budgets and then report to Parliament on the progress made in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As a central body, removed from implementation, how does it interact with others who are expected to follow its plans?

Andy Deacon (not Richard Hurford) - Energy Saving
The Energy Savings Trust is funded by UK Government, devolved Governments and the private sector to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions by advising people on how to use energy more efficiently, conserve water, reduce waste and make renewable energy sources more accessible. How does it turn advice into action when money often gets in the way?

Derek Parkin - Managing Director of Business Services at E.ON UK
Although reducing energy demand is bad business for generation companies, they still need to sell something. What is the future business model for an energy supplier?

My other questions under the heading of AGW/CC/GGE:

What is the observed correlation between levels of atmospheric CO2 and global temperature?
What is the forecast correlation between levels of atmospheric CO2 and global temperature?
What probability factors are associated with the forecast?

What is the observed correlation between global temperature and sealevel?
What is the forecast correlation between global temperature and sealevel?
What probability factors are associated with the forecast?

Fixing our broken Economy V Fixing our relationship with the EU

Dear Dave,

I hope I have misunderstood something but.........

It seems that as the incoming government you:

1) cannot fix the economy without changing EU rules;:

2) will put EU issues aside to concentrate on fixing the economy.

Chicken versus Egg

"It's only words..."

On Tuesday 6 October William Hague spoke at the Daily Telegraph forum at the Manchester conference.

Much of the debate centred on the day's principal topic: “Rebuilding our broken economy”.

Given the urgency of addressing these matters, I asked the question on constraints faced by the incoming government by EU directives and the impending ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.

His answer: that it would be necessary to opt out of the social chapter and the Working Time Directive.

What was clearly foreseeable on 6 October has now come to pass; the Treaty has been ratified.

You have now said:-

“First, if we win the next election, we will prohibit, by law, the transfer of further power to the EU without a referendum. Never again should it be possible for a British government to transfer power to the EU without the British people’s consent.

“Second, we will introduce a United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill to make it clear that ultimate authority stays in this country, in our Parliament.

“And third, we want to negotiate three specific guarantees with our European partners over powers that we believe should reside with Britain, not the EU. We will negotiate the return of Britain’s opt-out from social and employment legislation in those areas which have proved most damaging to our economy and public services. We also want a complete opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights. And we would negotiate for a return of powers in criminal justice to prevent EU judges gaining steadily greater control over our criminal justice system.”

With the power now vested in the EU following the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty aka the European Constitution, it is surely disingenuous (at the very least) to suggest that you will be allowed to pass the legislation you now plan?

Considering them in turn

- …”we will prohibit, by law, the transfer of further power to the EU without a referendum…”.

The treaty already gives the EU the power to take such powers as they wish (the escalator clause). So you don’t promise that such powers will NOT be transferred – you simply promise a referendum.

So you hold a referendum on a proposed transfer, we vote NO, and the power transfers anyway – as EU law overrides local law under the treaty..

“…we will introduce a United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill to make it clear that ultimate authority stays in this country, in our Parliament. “.

You don’t promise to pass such a law – and any such law is meaningless anyway as the treaty states that EU law overrides local law – so again pointless…

“…And third, we want to negotiate three specific guarantees with our European partners over powers …”.

You can guarantee to fail on this. Europe ministers from three member states: Poland, the Netherlands and the Irish Republic; have all stated that you would fail to achieve your demand to repatriate social and employment laws to Britain as this would need to the agreement of all 27 leaders of the EU because it would require amendment of EU treaties.

UK legislation of this kind would require our prior withdrawal from the Union to have any purpose.

Thursday, 29 October 2009

Climate Compensation

From The Times October 29, 2009
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6894604.ece
"Gordon Brown has suggested that the EU should pay €10 billion a year from 2020 to help poorer countries to go green and has said that Britain would pay €1 billion."


RT Comment


More hot air: fossil fuel consumption is going to keep rising regardless - driven by increasing global population and living standards.
Atmospheric CO2 levels will increase; if this is indeed the driver of climate change(= temperature increase)it is inevitable. Forget mitigation, concentrate on adaptation.

So, "Gordon Brown has said ... that Britain would pay €1 billion a year from 2020 .. to help poorer countries to go green.
Of course. We Brits are guilty of starting the industrial revolution and emitting lots of CO2. Just like we are guilty of inventing the slave trade etc. etc.
To which leaders in the "poorer countries" should we make out the cheques?
It would be as well to take advice from the Mo Ibrahim Foundation.
(The £3m annual prize for good governance in Africa will not be awarded this year.)