Make Biscuits Krusteaze

Buh! Here comes the Ecologist

The world seems increasingly strange. The roles change, and those who were once persecuted, are now the persecutors ... and backward

Why this discussion? Well I'll be frank: I'm fed up of Eco-skepticism. The Eco-skepticism is a new position (which we have spoken several times about all the problems of climate change), perhaps fueled by the neo-con ("and the mega-super chupi free market") it is assumed that all are hoaxes, the Earth does not need protection ... For those who fervently defend it, I would remind you a little something: one of the biggest neo-con (and Eco-skeptic) is George W Bush, which among other things is a creationist and fundamentalist religious, and his position is based on God is good and no one can harm us. Leaving religious or political considerations aside (and the alleged idiocy of Bush) going to do a little analysis to Eco-Skepticism.

is difficult to know when environmentalism was born. Already in the romance began to idealize the natural places (apart from cemeteries and churches in ruins), at the height of nineteenth-century nationalism (not to be confused with today) began to study the natural heritage of each country for the greater glory from their homeland. As a result of these movements appeared the first consciousness "natural" green.

However, we need to move many years until the decade of the 60 or so, when pacifism comes from a stream of "love" to Mother Earth. This love will have essentially two children, the New Age by Side (lizard lizard!) and environmentalism (though of a more emotional than scientific).

If you give a date for the birth of environmentalism "scientific" rather difficult task because many studies were in progress at the time, is 1962, year of publication of Silent Spring, which warned of the risks of certain substances chemical.

with green ideals and a more or less scientific, environmentalism will be present in our society since more or less influence on daily life. And what happens? Well, as in any site that has some ideology involved, appears irrational why many environmental groups are characterized.

Along with evolution of environmental (I have in mind a post about changes in "the main environmental problem of our Mother Earth), Science (the real one) has been advancing in the field of knowledge of ecosystems to the point that today we have a fairly completita of ecosystems (although far from enough). Thus, we have an army of environmental scientists (and non-environmentalists) to decide on what can or can not do.

ecologists have been radicalized and deeply entrenched in many aspects and sectors, this has not always been taken very good reputation. But it seems that are having more success lately, among other things by the boom of Climate Change. I would like to recall that merit is not the ecologists, although they who put the medals, but environmental scientists. And here come the eco-skeptics.

Although eco-skepticism has been always made to give a date of birth, say it is 2004, with the publication of the novel " State of Fear" by Michael Crichton. The biggest mistake of this book is put in the same bag of environmentalists and scientists.

higher environmentalism has been, stronger and has been the radical eco-skepticism. And another phenomenon I find it quite interesting, moreover there are turncoats (changed sides.) One element that is always present in any position are fundamentalist conspiracy: when arguments are not standing, because you pull a conspiracy more far-fetched as possible better and ready to roll.

something 20 years ago, people were so convinced that the oil had a kind of brotherhood evil and satanic rituals celebrating the devouring kittens and burned alive at successive inventors of infinite energy engines. Today things have changed, but although the names are different, the plot remains the same (and identically stupid).

The poor now are nuclear, yes those that environmentalists have long banished, because they want to gain ground, and promoting the climate change get people to start to fear more oil than our friend the uranium. And for this evil operation, now go hand in hand with environmentalists. Let

Gentlemen head what it is that environmentalists can agree with nuclear?. Conspiracies do not exist and the Magi are the parents. If it has become fashionable now global warming is because it has become fashionable, not because no one is feeding so concerned (politicians aside, of course)

And it is, be a little generous and accept that there are conspiracies: it is equally likely that there exists another. But here, who may be more interested in discrediting the other, nuclear or oil? For me to me that the oil, as are those with most to lose. Still, I remind you that we should not think of conspiracies.

Anyway, I'll be glad to read your comments and further discussion on the matter. By the way, I am NOT an environmentalist, but an environmental scientist (specifically environmentalists), but the eco-skeptics seem so clowns like environmentalists.

Make Biscuits Krusteaze

Buh! Here comes the Ecologist

The world seems increasingly strange. The roles change, and those who were once persecuted, are now the persecutors ... and backward

Why this discussion? Well I'll be frank: I'm fed up of Eco-skepticism. The Eco-skepticism is a new position (which we have spoken several times about all the problems of climate change), perhaps fueled by the neo-con ("and the mega-super chupi free market") it is assumed that all are hoaxes, the Earth does not need protection ... For those who fervently defend it, I would remind you a little something: one of the biggest neo-con (and Eco-skeptic) is George W Bush, which among other things is a creationist and fundamentalist religious, and his position is based on God is good and no one can harm us. Leaving religious or political considerations aside (and the alleged idiocy of Bush) going to do a little analysis to Eco-Skepticism.

is difficult to know when environmentalism was born. Already in the romance began to idealize the natural places (apart from cemeteries and churches in ruins), at the height of nineteenth-century nationalism (not to be confused with today) began to study the natural heritage of each country for the greater glory from their homeland. As a result of these movements appeared the first consciousness "natural" green.

However, we need to move many years until the decade of the 60 or so, when pacifism comes from a stream of "love" to Mother Earth. This love will have essentially two children, the New Age by Side (lizard lizard!) and environmentalism (though of a more emotional than scientific).

If you give a date for the birth of environmentalism "scientific" rather difficult task because many studies were in progress at the time, is 1962, year of publication of Silent Spring, which warned of the risks of certain substances chemical.

with green ideals and a more or less scientific, environmentalism will be present in our society since more or less influence on daily life. And what happens? Well, as in any site that has some ideology involved, appears irrational why many environmental groups are characterized.

Along with evolution of environmental (I have in mind a post about changes in "the main environmental problem of our Mother Earth), Science (the real one) has been advancing in the field of knowledge of ecosystems to the point that today we have a fairly completita of ecosystems (although far from enough). Thus, we have an army of environmental scientists (and non-environmentalists) to decide on what can or can not do.

ecologists have been radicalized and deeply entrenched in many aspects and sectors, this has not always been taken very good reputation. But it seems that are having more success lately, among other things by the boom of Climate Change. I would like to recall that merit is not the ecologists, although they who put the medals, but environmental scientists. And here come the eco-skeptics.

Although eco-skepticism has been always made to give a date of birth, say it is 2004, with the publication of the novel " State of Fear" by Michael Crichton. The biggest mistake of this book is put in the same bag of environmentalists and scientists.

higher environmentalism has been, stronger and has been the radical eco-skepticism. And another phenomenon I find it quite interesting, moreover there are turncoats (changed sides.) One element that is always present in any position are fundamentalist conspiracy: when arguments are not standing, because you pull a conspiracy more far-fetched as possible better and ready to roll.

something 20 years ago, people were so convinced that the oil had a kind of brotherhood evil and satanic rituals celebrating the devouring kittens and burned alive at successive inventors of infinite energy engines. Today things have changed, but although the names are different, the plot remains the same (and identically stupid).

The poor now are nuclear, yes those that environmentalists have long banished, because they want to gain ground, and promoting the climate change get people to start to fear more oil than our friend the uranium. And for this evil operation, now go hand in hand with environmentalists. Let

Gentlemen head what it is that environmentalists can agree with nuclear?. Conspiracies do not exist and the Magi are the parents. If it has become fashionable now global warming is because it has become fashionable, not because no one is feeding so concerned (politicians aside, of course)

And it is, be a little generous and accept that there are conspiracies: it is equally likely that there exists another. But here, who may be more interested in discrediting the other, nuclear or oil? For me to me that the oil, as are those with most to lose. Still, I remind you that we should not think of conspiracies.

Anyway, I'll be glad to read your comments and further discussion on the matter. By the way, I am NOT an environmentalist, but an environmental scientist (specifically environmentalists), but the eco-skeptics seem so clowns like environmentalists.

Handmade Retirement Card

Nobel Peace Prize for Al Gore and the moratorium

Well, and also for IPCC.

Former U.S. Vice President , Democratic candidate for the 2000 election, Oscar and Prince of Asturias award for An Inconvenient Truth ... , Al Gore, has been chosen to receive the Nobel prize for peace , 2007 precisely because An Inconvenient Truth and his efforts to spread the problem of global warming and environmental awareness. Likewise, so has received the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (or IPCC) for the same work.

We've talked several times about Global warming and even on the same documentary Al Gore. I predict controversy, as a Nobel comes after many years of effort, not a documentary.

But to his credit, Al Gore their efforts to spread global warming has paid off: today it seems that "fashion is " talk about climate change but also the problem of environmental conservation has depth and a lot in society.

My most sincere congratulations to Al Gore (although still seems a bit ... surreal ... you have been awarded the Nobel peace). I recommend watching An Inconvenient Truth , But from a critical perspective and willing to consider what is said.

PS Nobel Lords, I also try to spread environmental awareness, could not give it to me too?

Handmade Retirement Card

Nobel Peace Prize for Al Gore and the moratorium

Well, and also for IPCC.

Former U.S. Vice President , Democratic candidate for the 2000 election, Oscar and Prince of Asturias award for An Inconvenient Truth ... , Al Gore, has been chosen to receive the Nobel prize for peace , 2007 precisely because An Inconvenient Truth and his efforts to spread the problem of global warming and environmental awareness. Likewise, so has received the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (or IPCC) for the same work.

We've talked several times about Global warming and even on the same documentary Al Gore. I predict controversy, as a Nobel comes after many years of effort, not a documentary.

But to his credit, Al Gore their efforts to spread global warming has paid off: today it seems that "fashion is " talk about climate change but also the problem of environmental conservation has depth and a lot in society.

My most sincere congratulations to Al Gore (although still seems a bit ... surreal ... you have been awarded the Nobel peace). I recommend watching An Inconvenient Truth , But from a critical perspective and willing to consider what is said.

PS Nobel Lords, I also try to spread environmental awareness, could not give it to me too?

White Spots In Cat Pooh

nuclear Lemoniz

This weekend I had the pleasure of visiting San Sebastian in the company of my colleagues CPIeros . Thank you very much for such wonderful hosts, and Igoretas Bushmen, have brought me good times Euskadi. Among the many stories they have told us, one of the most have left me impressed was that of the nuclear power Lemoniz .


View larger map

I admit, I'm too young to remember firsthand the events that preceded the nuclear moratorium, and perhaps for this reason, curiosity led me to write this post. Lemoniz history is sad, and demonstrates once again how irrational human beings. Do not go into political assessments, I will leave that to those who want to waste time, and in this blog only we care about the environment and science.

Everyone knows that Spain is currently no nuclear power, longer arms, but energy. However there was an ambitious project to develop nuclear energy extensively throughout the territory. We can put a date: in 1948 (only 3 years after the Hiroshima bomb), a group of scientists and military cover Atomic Research Board, in order to exploit uranium reserves that exist in Spain, and subsequently Nuclear Energy Board (JEN). The first experimental reactors came quickly, as the ARGOS, the IBA or JEN-I. The first nuclear power plant was operational Jose Cabrera in 1968, which has been operational until 2006. Garoña followed , Almaraz, Ascó , Cofrentes , Valdellós and Trillo, all built between 1970 and 1987. In total 10 reactors of which only 8 are active.

Public opinion is very susceptible, and there were two episodes unrelated to determine the energy policy of this country. The first was the Oil Crisis 1973, when OPEC decided to close the tap on oil exports (and wish I had been at least for environmental reasons, but again the irrationality of the human race offers us unpleasant surprises) . All the world's economy was affected, showing we are very dependent oil. Sure, it was necessary to develop alternative energy sources, and the spotlight was atomic energy.

was given much impetus to the development of nuclear energy in our country, many of the plants currently in operation were built at that time and invested large capital to develop new projects. But then he broke another historical event in the face of power: Chernobyl. (I remember the Chernobyl did not explode, is a metaphor)

The growing reluctance of people to the atomic energy was making things difficult, but the Chernobyl became impossible. Five reactors

remain unfinished: Lemoniz (I and II), Valdecaballeros (I and II) and Trillo (II). And here is where the sad story of Lemoniz. Lemoniz

never had the satisfaction of the Basque people. It constituted a Committee on Defense of Nuclear Costa Vasca not mobilized the people against this work. So far so good, the end of the public participation is a key element in environmental policy. The problem arose when the terrorist group ETA (or liberation army, I do not care whatever you want to call it) endorsed the anti-nuclear cause. Consequently, an increase in violence, two bombs in construction that killed 3-workers, constant acts of sabotage, the death of an ETA when they tried to enter the civil guard barracks, the death of an anti-nuclear activist in a police charge ... are acts that never, ever justify anything. What I got was to delegitimize the movement ETA citizen.

But what ended the accumulation of nonsense was the kidnapping and subsequent murder of the Chief Engineer, Jose Maria Ryan, in 1981. Although the work was at a standstill, even claimed another victim, Angel Pascual Mugica, in 1982, director of the company trying to complete the project.

The end justifies the means, and no human life, whether political color that is, worth less than the anti-or pro-nuclear ideas.

Lemoniz The event was one of the causes that determined the nuclear moratorium in 1984. The moratorium is a halt nuclear projects for an indefinite time. This moratorium has caused the power losses estimated at more than 700 billion pesetas (more than 4 billion €). In fact, to compensate for this loss, our electricity bill has included a canon dedicated to "give back" this money to the utilities. But this is not the only consequence, the English state had to force an increase in electricity generation in other systems, such as hydro or heat. And ironies of life (or rather hypocrisy, I would say), we bought a good MW to France, which does nuclear energy widely used (and shamelessly). But not everything is negative, since it also has allowed the development of renewable energy.

We are now at a point which has reopened the debate on energy, oil reserves will not last forever, and we must keep in mind that oil is much more useful for many other activities (some say diamonds burn!), coal is dirty (and you though some may be up radioactive). We need to consider new energy sources that allow us to emancipate ourselves from fossil fuels and if we do not want to dispense with all our energy, we must seriously consider using nuclear energy. But that will give me to another post on the NIMBY ...

Meanwhile, the concrete shell of the Central Lemoniz still remember what happened in the 80's, being a silent witness to our irrationality.

Alugnos Links: Wiki
Nuclear Power Lemoniz
a technical world: post in which he reflects on the implications of the moratorium
Nuclear Technology Handbook for Journalists (pdf)
Lemoiz Apurtu: web antinuclear but with a detailed chronology of Lemoniz

White Spots In Cat Pooh

nuclear Lemoniz

This weekend I had the pleasure of visiting San Sebastian in the company of my colleagues CPIeros . Thank you very much for such wonderful hosts, and Igoretas Bushmen, have brought me good times Euskadi. Among the many stories they have told us, one of the most have left me impressed was that of the nuclear power Lemoniz .


View larger map

I admit, I'm too young to remember firsthand the events that preceded the nuclear moratorium, and perhaps for this reason, curiosity led me to write this post. Lemoniz history is sad, and demonstrates once again how irrational human beings. Do not go into political assessments, I will leave that to those who want to waste time, and in this blog only we care about the environment and science.

Everyone knows that Spain is currently no nuclear power, longer arms, but energy. However there was an ambitious project to develop nuclear energy extensively throughout the territory. We can put a date: in 1948 (only 3 years after the Hiroshima bomb), a group of scientists and military cover Atomic Research Board, in order to exploit uranium reserves that exist in Spain, and subsequently Nuclear Energy Board (JEN). The first experimental reactors came quickly, as the ARGOS, the IBA or JEN-I. The first nuclear power plant was operational Jose Cabrera in 1968, which has been operational until 2006. Garoña followed , Almaraz, Ascó , Cofrentes , Valdellós and Trillo, all built between 1970 and 1987. In total 10 reactors of which only 8 are active.

Public opinion is very susceptible, and there were two episodes unrelated to determine the energy policy of this country. The first was the Oil Crisis 1973, when OPEC decided to close the tap on oil exports (and wish I had been at least for environmental reasons, but again the irrationality of the human race offers us unpleasant surprises) . All the world's economy was affected, showing we are very dependent oil. Sure, it was necessary to develop alternative energy sources, and the spotlight was atomic energy.

was given much impetus to the development of nuclear energy in our country, many of the plants currently in operation were built at that time and invested large capital to develop new projects. But then he broke another historical event in the face of power: Chernobyl. (I remember the Chernobyl did not explode, is a metaphor)

The growing reluctance of people to the atomic energy was making things difficult, but the Chernobyl became impossible. Five reactors

remain unfinished: Lemoniz (I and II), Valdecaballeros (I and II) and Trillo (II). And here is where the sad story of Lemoniz. Lemoniz

never had the satisfaction of the Basque people. It constituted a Committee on Defense of Nuclear Costa Vasca not mobilized the people against this work. So far so good, the end of the public participation is a key element in environmental policy. The problem arose when the terrorist group ETA (or liberation army, I do not care whatever you want to call it) endorsed the anti-nuclear cause. Consequently, an increase in violence, two bombs in construction that killed 3-workers, constant acts of sabotage, the death of an ETA when they tried to enter the civil guard barracks, the death of an anti-nuclear activist in a police charge ... are acts that never, ever justify anything. What I got was to delegitimize the movement ETA citizen.

But what ended the accumulation of nonsense was the kidnapping and subsequent murder of the Chief Engineer, Jose Maria Ryan, in 1981. Although the work was at a standstill, even claimed another victim, Angel Pascual Mugica, in 1982, director of the company trying to complete the project.

The end justifies the means, and no human life, whether political color that is, worth less than the anti-or pro-nuclear ideas.

Lemoniz The event was one of the causes that determined the nuclear moratorium in 1984. The moratorium is a halt nuclear projects for an indefinite time. This moratorium has caused the power losses estimated at more than 700 billion pesetas (more than 4 billion €). In fact, to compensate for this loss, our electricity bill has included a canon dedicated to "give back" this money to the utilities. But this is not the only consequence, the English state had to force an increase in electricity generation in other systems, such as hydro or heat. And ironies of life (or rather hypocrisy, I would say), we bought a good MW to France, which does nuclear energy widely used (and shamelessly). But not everything is negative, since it also has allowed the development of renewable energy.

We are now at a point which has reopened the debate on energy, oil reserves will not last forever, and we must keep in mind that oil is much more useful for many other activities (some say diamonds burn!), coal is dirty (and you though some may be up radioactive). We need to consider new energy sources that allow us to emancipate ourselves from fossil fuels and if we do not want to dispense with all our energy, we must seriously consider using nuclear energy. But that will give me to another post on the NIMBY ...

Meanwhile, the concrete shell of the Central Lemoniz still remember what happened in the 80's, being a silent witness to our irrationality.

Alugnos Links: Wiki
Nuclear Power Lemoniz
a technical world: post in which he reflects on the implications of the moratorium
Nuclear Technology Handbook for Journalists (pdf)
Lemoiz Apurtu: web antinuclear but with a detailed chronology of Lemoniz