the duchy of hetkettle trophish

you know i mean well, right, i mean i don’t pick fights. i pick at scabs but that’s different from fights. but i was looking at this worldchanging article…

But carbon neutrality is quite straight forward, and something very possible indeed.

The three steps —

1. Account for your carbon footprint
2. Reduce your carbon footprint
3. Purchase off-sets that bring you to zero.

Carbon Neutral by 2020, How New Zealanders can tackle climate change is a collection of sixteen essays by leading experts about how their specific industries can achieve this seemingly lofty goal.

and i was thinking, alright, there’s some dust being swept under there in step three, but i’m with this. i’m with this.

What Carbon Neutral by 2020 doesn’t present is the concept of an enforced global movement or liken the required course of action to the re-configuration of society during war. Each chapter assumes, for the most part, that existing framework will remain the same as it is today — an expectation that I find very realistic.

and i was thinking, wait, i thought the whole war metaphor thing was metaphorical. but this feels different, like, like.…

i haven’t read this book and i haven’t talked to the writer of this review. and i’m totally for friendly and getting people to act without panic. but. how do i say this.

In the bizarre logic of the carbon market, a market the World Bank is both shaping and investing in, yes, Country B can get credits for helping a corporation [in Country A], even one of the world’s wealthiest corporations such as Tata, capture a few carbon emissions [from a coal-fired power plant under construction], as long as these emissions are captured in a “poor” country, like India, regardless of how rich the company involved may be.

yeah, that’ll do it. so you just off-set the rest. lord knows today’s bankers’ll keep your faith in a locked box till you need it back. good as new!

ps. you need it back already. go get it. quick.

The challenge now is to translate their findings into national energy policies designed to save the glaciers. At issue is not just the future of mountain glaciers, but the future of world grain harvests.

ps. more from treehugger.

• video of the diesel-kite hybrid boat! that covers its cost in “3 or 4 years.” let’s call lifetime for a cargo ship >20 but of course all current equipment’s lease on life is up for renewal, at nature’s request.
• elites love the nuclear option. i’ve read more about the “renaissance” and must say people outside the industry are not listening well if they think actual professional nuclear proponents are actually suggesting actually replacing coal with uranium. they — including skilled labor — appear only to want some money — mere hundreds of billions — aka “plenty, thanks” — for which they must gov-u-flect. in my mind, i picture casual public proponents truly advocating an increase-with-replacements from 6% now to 6% in a future with higher-but-totally-renewable energy use, while muttering something under their breath about stupid-hippies-i-hate-you.
• knowledge is power, which corrupts. “researchers found [among americans] that high levels of confidence in scientists resulted in a decreased sense of responsibility for global warming.” no, you can’t read the paper itself, doesn’t that suck, but various direct quotes make it sound like the researchers aren’t ready to say “causal.” i liked it because it’s more grist for the cognitive cuddle/calculator split. “rational people rationalize things! also: puppies cute.”

pps. that’s the future of world grain harvests, with a ‘g’.

because i think it’s a red herring

but this nice discussion of issues facing NATO also opposes red herrings

so i suggest reading it.

i say so.

and nothing will ever ever ever ever ever ever ever change my mind, but that’s ok, because our divine cause is above human reproach in the good way.

ps. once those not converted are destroyed we will have peace in our time. this is my commitment to your eternal soul. in the kingdom to come you’ll thank me.

pps. but really, my only concern is that israel be given its same right to self-defense through preventive war — foreign or domestic — as any other moral nation, such as mine and others i will name later. the corrupt must not hold us hostage.

ppps. that’s what i said: “i am resolutely against the killing of innocent people.”

pppps. what exactly did you mean, showing me that video chat? (via)

find out here. very fine pictures.

ps. coincidences! last year i asked myself the same question.

pps. those were the days nothing worried me but deadly magma.…

why are you screaming.

there’s no way out and i can’t breathe the walls are closing in and “taiwan, vietnam, malaysia and indonesia have clashed over underwater oil reserves in the south china sea” and the roaches

here, this is an alternative, a whole plan.

there’s no time there’s no willpower we are fucked forever

i don’t think it’s impractical, by the numbers.

history is my guide, not numbers

then in this case — you are an asshole.

(later)

john gray… where have i heard that name before…

i’ve read it

and?

“there is, in fact, not the remotest prospect of the world adopting anything like monbiot’s programme, but [since nature's about to kill us anyway] this may not matter.”

if you’re thinking of suicide, i have some extra sleeping pills.

pps. sure is tough times for true believers, huh.

what should we call the sierra nevada mountain range, when the snowcaps are gone?

i said unions and churches were the key. can’t tell you how light my shoulders feel right now. can’t even start to describe.

ps. in thanks, i will try harder to shine my light forward.

oh ho, another idea, when will they end.

ps. oh, funnier and funnier. nevada means “snowcapped”? that is unfortunate.

for the hour with 31 minutes — to go — we negotiated battery-powered gizmos into the deal — watts it to you, anyway — but living in the dark — isn’t a new experience — i hope we can do all this.

trying to blow out the sense of rampant growth in celebrity apologetics.