Poisoning the Food and Water

Who needs all this pesky environmentalism stuff, anyway? We're not even talking global warming climate change anymore. We're talking about all the poison within 100 miles of home.



And for the poison just outside that circle, there's still oil spilling into the Gulf of Mexico. But don't worry, BP assures us it has nothing to do with them.



.

Cultural Economy

I commented at Cliff's Crib that, if more people truly understood what their tax dollars paid for, our national conversation about government would be completely different.

Instead, the national conversation is awash in complete misconceptions, falsehoods, and made-up theoreticals. One of those is that "the government does not/should not provide funding for the arts." This one has been around for a while, and is a narrative often trotted out as an anecdotal example of pervasive government waste and the largeness of government size. The perception is that government pays artists to create pretty pictures or songs, and that the money never goes anywhere else. People who buy into that narrative seem to think this government money is there simply to subsidize the bohemian lifestyles of liberal, artsy types.

The truth is, arts and culture have tremendous economic impact all over the United States, and any honest discussion of the validity of government funding should take that economic impact into account.

Because if it is worth $400 million to the state of Georgia to land a KIA assembly plant, it may be worth it to the state to fund the arts and culture as well. It all depends on the return on investment per government dollar spent, and the taxpayers deserve to hear the truth about the economic impact of their tax dollars. Unfortunately, all they're getting right now are narratives and platitudes, as return on investment isn't a part of the "Big Government Waste" conversation we so often hear.

(HT: Jeffrey)

.

Subsidizing the Arts

Author Kevin Kane recently advocated Louisiana cut subsidies for 'the arts' in the Pelican State.

If there is evidence that government support has been integral to any of these great traditions, Martin does not offer it.

Lamar quickly takes him to task:

Mardi Gras? I hate to break it to you, but it’s publicly-subsidized.

.

Disaster Funding

Attempting to solidify his "fiscal conservative" credentials, Mitt Romney wants to send responsibility for disaster relief back to the states, if not private industry. Continuing to handle disaster relief at a Federal level "jeopardizes the future for our kids" and is "immoral."

Which makes me wonder just how bad disasters have to get in this country to remind someone so out-of-touch why the Federal government started getting involved in this in the first place.

And maybe I've got the wrong definition of "fiscal conservative" in my mind, but I thought one of the bottom lines of that belief system was to make sure any tax dollars spent were done so in the most efficient and effective way possible, with a subtext of keeping the overall national economy sound. Removing disaster relief as a responsibility of the Federal government only makes sense if your definition of "fiscal conservatism" is don't spend any money, ever and you don't give a shit about localized or regional problems dragging down the whole national economy.

Here's something Romney needs to be reminded of: the states already pay for disaster relief. Private organizations already pay for disaster relief. Do you know why the Federal government also needs to be involved, Mitt? Because even with their efforts combined, the states and private organizations cannot touch the level of funding required to relieve even moderately sized disasters in terms of economic and material damage, let alone the big ones.

So let's look at the numbers from the big leagues of disasters. One low estimate places the damage figures of Hurricane Katrina and the Federal Flood at $81 Billion*, not including overall economic impact to the states and regions most affected or the nation at large. Keep in mind that, at the time, gasoline got up to $4 a gallon many places far, far away from the Gulf Coast.

Let's do a little common sense math. Compare that figure to the state budget of Louisiana for FY 2005 ($17.5 Billion), the state budget of Mississippi for 2005 (just under $13 Billion), and the state budget of Alabama for 2005 ($33.2 Billion).

All three of those total state budgets combined ($63.7 Billion) only make up 78% of the total low damage estimate. That means three states of the union most affected by Katrina and the levee failures would have had to spend every single tax dollar they recieved that year and it still wouldn't have covered the recovery. And that's a total figure, which means the states wouldn't be able to pay for anything else without massive deficit spending.

While private organizations contributed a tremendous effort and generous sums of money and materiel to the recovery, do you think they'd be able to come up with $17.3 BILLION?

Of course, the states could have rebuilt without Federal help, given a generation or three. But who can estimate the economic fallout to these most affected states, the larger regional impact, and to the Union at large if these areas were forced into a local or regionalized recovery that the most affected states couldn't pay for before the disaster destroyed huge swaths of their state economies?

I can only imagine that Louisiana would have had to levy higher duties on shipping interests bringing products through what was left of New Orleans to even begin making a dent in their recovery needs. The economic ripples would have affected every suburban commutuer in America who drives a car and every American whose diet depends on the Midwestern corn crop. Things that happen one place tend to affect the lives of others someplace else. A butterfly flaps its wings and all that.

Now run that same scenario against these figures. Or just look at the map (PDF).

Sure looks like a national problem needing national solutions to me. And if "conservatism" means we throw responsibility for all that back on the states, private organizations, and - make no mistake - the individual familes who fall victim to such disasters, maybe it is time to start thinking of "conservatism" as its own dirty word.

(* - NOAA estimates the damage at $133 Billion)

How Not to Build Stuff

Maybe they should have thought of this, or something like it BEFORE they declared imminent domain and bulldozed the neighborhood that existed there before. You want to talk about government waste?

Step 1: Your city has a teaching hospital run by the public state university that treats a high volume of at-risk patients. The system has big problems, but the building is solid and would be viable given some serious renovations.

Step 2: Man-made disaster seriously damages the teaching hospital.

Step 3: Agents of the government attempt to repair the teaching hospital. It is a hospital in the middle of a disaster area. Such facilities tend to be useful.

Step 4: Agents of the public state university allegedly stop repairs and close the teaching hospital. They want to declare the old hospital a loss, collect insurance money, collect national disaster money and build a new teaching hospital.

Step 5A: Powers that be know where they would put a new hospital. Friends, family, and connections begin buying cheap land in and around that area. These properties are left to moulder because they'll all get torn down when the new teaching hospital gets built.

Step 5B: Regular citizens who live in that area move back into their homes, and use what little insurance and government disaster aid they can apply for to renovate their homes. They aren't informed by the powers that be that all of their properties will be seized by imminent domain and torn down to make way for a new teaching hospital.

Step 6: Argue in public over the option to renovate the old teaching hospital (for $600 million) or build a new teaching hospital (for $1.2 billion). Ignore homeowners and businesses and other government agencies who have sunk money into properties that will be demolished. Let several years go by without much action, because who really needs a public hospital in the middle of a disaster area to serve at-risk populations?

Step 7: Convince the US Department of Veterans Affairs that the new teaching hospital is a done deal, and that they should start building their new hospital nearby.

Step 8: Convince developers and investors that the new teaching hospital is a done deal, and that they should start building new retail and residential use facilities as if the new hospital is guaranteed to be built.

(Seriously, I have a friend in another city, and some NOLA booster organization gave them a sales pitch that this hospital would be ready to open this fall or winter, with 5,000 new professional jobs coming to town.)

Step 9: Win the argument despite divisive local opionion and viable, cheaper alternatives. A Shiny New Hospital Will Be Built! Begin declaring eminent domain and bulldozing buildings. Move a few historical buildings to shut up the most agitating homeowners and preservationists. Clear dozens of city blocks of structures.

Step 10: Have state and federal officials representing competing intereststs attempt to derail the project at the last minute under the name of hostage taking fiscal conservatism.

Because if you think anything above describes fiscal conservatism (or fiscal liberalism, for that matter) you watch too much cable network news and don't understand the definition.

As a whole, words just fail.

.

How's That Moratorium Working For You?

Maitri engages in some media criticism over the announcement that ExxonMobil has hit vast new oil reserves in the Gulf of Mexico.

Depending on your political bent and which talk-radio blowhard you listen to, you might have thought TEH EBIL COMMUNIZMS of KENYAN ANTI-COLONIALIST OBAMA were trying to keep anyone from drilling oil in the Gulf of Mexico, and that this "moratorium" was somehow affecting gasoline prices and killing jobs.

Or you could be surprised that any oil companies were allowed to think about fossil fuels within 200 miles of the Gulf of Mexico, much less have already resumed drilling. Wasn't this stuff shut down with the BP "shakedown?"

If so, congratulations! You've been misled by someone with an agenda. What I find interesting is that people on both sides of the issue (Drill, Baby, Drill vs. Spill, Baby, Spill) appear to have been misled into believing nearly the same things.

.

"Resegregating the South"

Cynthia Tucker at the AJC reexamines the unintended consequences of the Voting Rights Act of 1984. She starts with a mea culpa and then blisters the effect gerrymandering redistricting has had on our nation as a whole, and particularly the South.

And if it is to change, we will need many voices ready to overcome the racially-based demoagougery we are sure to hear from the left. Especially the machine politicians who benefit the most directly from turning majority-minority districts into personal fiefdoms.

If black voters think they have made substantial gains simply by having more black representatives in Congress, they’re wrong. They’d have more influence if they were spread through several legislative districts, forcing more candidates to court them.

I'm glad to hear someone saying it. Y'all what has been going on is bad for everyone. We need more demographically balanced districts all over the country, and we will need them if we ever, ever hope to rationally address the problems this nation is facing.

Case and point: Louisiana just got some new Congressional districts. Take a moment and look at the map. See if you can guess which one is specifically drawn to concentrate as many minority voters as possible.

Then look at the demographics. For a state that is one-third African-American, African-Americans have a voice in only one-sixth of the state's Congressional delegation.

Unintended consequences don't begin to cover it.

.

"Barbecue" Rymes with "Argue"

Though mostly good natured arguing. Because at the heart of the matter, we are talking about sharing food with family, community, and culture,. Sauce and style have become more of a team effort in the internet age. Wear your Eastern Carolina jersey proudly, y'all, I'll be over here onboard the Southern Soul train reppin' Island City barbecue 'till I die.

Where I grew up in Georgia, we had a lot of barbecue at a lot of different places. Some was pork, some was beef, some was chicken or sausage or venison cooked over the same coals. Because if you've already got the coals working, what's the harm in more meat over the fire?

There was usually a selection of sauces: vinegar based, tomato based, mustard based. There were even flavors: hot, sweet, and regular. And you could order it chopped or pulled.

Now that I live in New Orleans, there is cochon-de-lait. Which is either very similar or entirely different from "barbecue" depending on who you are talking to. And, of course, barbecue shrimp - which is its own culinary category altogether.

For some folks, "barbecue" is a noun: the pork and/or beef that is cooked for a long time at "low" heat over a pit of coals. Chicken or sausage or venison didn't count as "barbecue," but were just the sauce covered side-items to the "barbecue."

For others "barbecue" is the verb of cooking any or all meats at "low" heat over a pit of coals. As someone who grew up in Coastal Georgia, this is the closest to my cultural upbringing.

Though there is one line I draw with my inclusiveness: grillin' is not barbecue.

.

Flood Panels (continued)

This weekend, decisions were made. In Louisiana, the US Army Corps of Engineers doesn't need to blow up levees along the Mississippi River, because there are already flood control structures in place to handle the overflow.

For the Bonne Carre spillway, this decision is easier made. Water flows from the River into Lake Pontchartrain. This might raise the level of the lake a few feet, causing some problems to those who live in low lying areas. It also affects the fisheries, as that much freshwater can change the habitats of lake and sea life very rapidly. When making the call between threatening the levees and industrial infrastructure downriver, that's not a difficult choice to make. The Bonne Carre has been open for some time now.

But those costs are minor ones compared to the opening of the Morganza. The Morganza spills Mississippi River water into the Atchafalaya River, and into communities that aren't as well-protected as Baton Rouge and New Orleans. The water is going to back up tributaries and bayous significantly (as it did on the Mississippi far upriver) and flood a lot of homes even far away from the banks of the river.

Hence the long wait to open Morganza. Not only did the USACoE have to give those people time to evacuate, or protect their property with sandbags, but it had to make a case that leaving the Mississippi River flowing at its current volume could do massive damage to Baton Rouge, New Orleans, and the nation's shipping and oil refining infrastructure. With a flood this big, it doesn't really matter how strong the levees are in Baton Rouge and New Orleans.

Those costs were weighed both ways, and the decision was made. Morganza opened this weekend. Acadiana is preparing for high water, again, and Louisiana is preparing to bear the brunt of high human costs associated with flooding.

The political implications boil my blood. Demagouges and populist sentiment won't wait long to point out that rural communities in "Real America" were sacrificed for cities and "elites" as if that makes any sort of sense in Louisiana's case. The same people would be screaming about the high price of gasoline if the refineries were allowed to flood for a month. There will - of course - be a racial undertone to it, as insidious as that is. I've already heard the phrase "President Obama Doesn't Care About White People," in reference to Kanye West's infamous response to flooding after Hurricane Katrina.

But what won't be talked about - again - is why this is happening. Why is the river flooding so badly up and down the Mississippi River? Why did decisions like this have to be made? How can our current infrastructure and zoning be made to more effectively mitigate this sort of thing? Why did most flooding come from tributaries? Why is the Louisiana coast disappearing? Why are areas so much more prone to flooding today?

Because - pay attention - this is what it looks like when the system we currently have works. This is the plan. This is our nation's cost of doing business the same way we always have. Two observations come from that:

One - if you think this cost too much, imagine if the system wasn't working as planned. I'll give you a hint, it would be 2005 flooding expensive.

Two - if you want a better flood control policy in this country, it is going to cost a lot of long term money. You have to weigh that against long-term costs.

.

Disaster Politics

Unsurprisingly, there are a few individuals (mostly website comment trolls) who consider themselves on "the left," who are taking the opportunity of the Tornado disasters and Mississippi River flooding to oversimplify the political beliefs of Southerners and write us all off as Tea Partiers demanding smaller government. By virtue of our assumed collective hatred for TEH SOCIALIZMS of disaster recovery, they think we should live our values now and not ask for any Federal aid. Viewing the South through such a lens, they then descend into "blame the victim" territory so ably applied by their political rivals.

Beyond the fact that their finger-wagging is an absolute failure of narrative building (at which they simply are not prepared to compete with the right), they end up running into other folks on "the left" who despise the concepts of collective blame, political marketing, and false equivalence.

Folks with more crediblity are ready to stop them in their tracks:

Hating on the South in the comments for voting Republican will get you banned, permanently. I'm in no mood.

Thanks for that.

It also got me thinking. Most importantly, disasters don't check your voter registration before they come crashing through the door. Anyone, anywhere. There but for the Grace of God go I.

But there are apparently plenty of folks who do concern themselves with the voting patterns of Southerners as it relates to the current state of disaster. Not that it should matter, but look at this map alongside the one of where flooding is the worst. Look at the 2008 election returns in Tuscaloosa and Jefferson Counties in Alabama.

Which way did the disaster victims vote, again? And, again, why does it matter?

I hesitate to bring that up. The chorus of "why do you live by a river" is already warming up in the national narrative, and I'm sure there are plenty of right wing elements who are going to use the "handouts" to flood victims and anecdotes of government ineffectiveness in their own states in order to raise some political capital for the next election. I'd expect the same demagougery from Democratic or "liberal" elements as well. Same as it ever was.

.

Flood Panels

You remember "Death Panels?" They were fake.

But Flood Panels actually do exist, and they decide whose property gets flooded and whose doesn't. And they do it all with your tax dollars.

Maybe if the people who got all riled up about the fake Death Panels came back to reality for 5 minutes and thought about our nation's very real Flood Panels, we might actually get a sane flood control policy in this country.

.

Republican Change I Can Believe In

Louisiana School Board members having to serve as substitute teachers in their systems?

Yes, yes, a thousand times, yes.

Hell, I don't even think the bill goes far enough.

One day a month substitute teaching whenever school is in session. At the most at-risk public schools. At least.

And it should be every single elected state official. Don't just stop at School Board members. The governor and the legislators and, yes, even judges - they should all get a chance to see what consequences their decisions have on the children of this state.

And to the business man who doesn't want to do it? Choice words. Elections have consequences, after all.

.

Small Government at Work

You know why I don't trust the "Small Government" concept of political management? Contractors. If you operate on the premise that you can "run government like a business" and that "government can't manage things correctly," then it makes sense that one of the ways you deliver public services to the community is to set out a bid for a contract, and go with the lowest bidder for the services.

On its face, this appears to shrink the government and save the taxpayers money.

In practice, however, it leads to nonsense like New Orleans' traffic camera fiasco.*

In this case, an external entity has convinced a government officials to purchase their services in an effort to raise revenue for the government budget under the guise of increasing safety. This is an incredibly unpopular program that would likely be voted down if offered up on a referendum, and has been the subject of many lawsuits. To legally administer the program while protecting the city from litigation raised by the program requires measures that have led to the suspensions of high level police officials who were part of the "clean up corruption" regime.

This happens because the program is ripe for corruption, and even the most above-board administration appears dirty when you've got this much money made from a low political risk program that delivers nearly unchallengeable verdicts regarding an almost indefensible crime. (Disclaimer: I've been caught by one of these cameras.)

My problem is that the city shouldn't be making money in this way, and shouldn't be depending on revenue generated. As Mark points out:

Even if you buy into the idea that the cameras are more about safety than revenues, it still doesn’t make sense for a city to rely on revenues from scofflaws. If the cameras DO actually change driving behavior, as proponents suggest, then these traffic camera revenues will decline over time anyway, as people drive more safely. That creates an incentive for the city to install ever more cameras to overcome the decline in ticket funds.

If the program's big proponents are defending it because the city will lose money if it is terminated, then you see the only reason we have this program. And it ain't public safety. It is about a snake-oil solution to a problem no one wants to face politically.

The better idea, it seems to me, is for this city to fix its incredible revenue problems as well as the city's unbelievable spending problems. Because, like most governments, this city has both problems in abundance.

.

* Which is not to be confused with the non-revenue generating New Orleans crime camera fiasco. That wasn't about public safety, either.

.

The Flood

Jerz and I have often spoken of government waste over the years.

Is anyone ready to start questioning why the best plan available to the Midwest and South is to blow up the levees?

I mean, if you have to destroy something and cause a catastrophe in order to escape and even bigger catastrophe, what does that tell you?

.

Chemical Weapons

I don't know what makes me angrier:

1. The company that has subjected the Gulf Coast to one of the worst environmental disasters in history

2. That the company gets tax subsidies for doing so

3. That Democrats allowed it to happen, and did everything they could to cover it up

4. That Republicans called what happened a "shakedown" and insist we do more to help the company responsible

5. That the big national media is obviously ignoring the story

6. That many Americans are happy to keep believing that everything is OK now

.

Liveblogging Oil & Water

Loyola University New Orleans is hosting "Oil & Water: Spotlight on the Gulf" as part of the 2011 President's Forum Series.

Participants include Virginia Burkett, Ph.D. of the USGS; Amy Harmon of the New York Times; Cynthia Sarthou of the Gulf Restoration Network; and the panel is moderated by Robert Thomas, Ph.D., Loyola Center for Environmental Communcation.

8:55pm Questions.

Q. Are you finding oil in the water these days?
A. (Greco) No. Hasn't seen the first drop of oil where he works.

Q. Several companies producing bacteria-eating oil felt stymied by government.
A. (Sarthou) In the days after the spill, Gulf REstoration Network was contacted by hundreds of technologists with ideas, but those ideas had not been tested. BP created a number, but besides the Kevin Costner solution and the Whale, no one seems to have gotten through. Agents appeared uncomfortable with biological agents and preferred mechanical solutions.

Q. How has this affected oysters?
A. (Sarthou) Many oyster beds unaffected. Some areas were devastated. It depended on where you were.

Q. Government telling people oysters are safe, but some folks are saying they aren't safe.
A. (Sarthou) Again, it depends on where the oysters were. Oysters are filter feeders, if there was stuff in the water they take it in.
A. (Thomas) When you see studies, make sure you check sample sizes and where the areas were.
A. (Greco) Has checked on oyster leases and eaten dozens of oysters since the spill, and they've all been OK.

Q. What studies are examining the dispersant, and what have they found?
A. (Sarthou) Studies haven't really been finished yet. Have spoken to toxicologists finding disturbing information on whale autopsies, but studies have not been comprehensive. Using FOIA to find information. EPA has not complied with Oil Pollution Act over the last 20 years, so studies have not been conducted to determine a baseline or determine ingredients in some dispersants.

Q. Why haven't national media (NYT, LA Times) been ignoring human health impacts, only hearing about it in local papers.
A. (Harmon) Can't speak for all media. NYT has people looking into it, but she'd be receptive to evidence.

Q. Points of clarity: Louisiana had good luck in that oil didn't get into many oyster beds, and tests have proven they're ok. Many federal studies ongoing, but being held up by funding issues.

Q. Is Gulf Future plan working for true mediation, what is being done to promote new technologies to remove and neutralize oil and corexit?
A. (Sarthou) GRN does not promote technologies, if there are technologies available, you can go to the Feds. Examining dispersant and the claims that it is still being sprayed. Biggest problem in terms of technology is that many people have come to GRN and asked to promote technology, but there is a lack of expertise on technological issues. Sarthou is an attorney not a chemist or a bio-scientist. Try to refer technologists to Congress to institute a system to test technolgies. Congress is not very friendly to this issue since this last elections, and congress has Gulf fatigue - think the Gulf has too much money and too much attention.

Q. Entire Louisiana delegation is against oil industry accountability. What strategies or tactics does GRN use to get stakeholders involved?
A. (Sarthou) Partners of oil industry will talk to them. If you have long-term plans for diversions, you're talking 10 - 15 years. Trying to come up with short-term components that can be cost effective to "stop the bleeding." Try to talk to people about things, in addition to suing people.

Q. If they're building new canals, are they putting any back or filling any in?
A. (Sarthou) Sometimes, usually when it does happen, they put a block at one end of the canal instead of filling it in.

Q. Will you swim in the Gulf of Mexico this summer?
A. (Sarthou) Probably. I ran through DDT when I was a young child, so whatever damage it would do would already be done. There are tarballs all over the Gulf, but not sure the water is contaminated.

Q. What about privatizing the Gulf restoration, especially if the government refuses to help.
A. (Sarthou) Own opinion, not organizations. Everyone wants privatization, but when some disaster happens, folks ask where the government is. Where states have privatized prisons, treatment gets worse while costs go up. With restoration, you have to take private land and shut down industry, private businesses might not be able to make the changes necessary. In the central wetlands, they're having trouble figuring out who owns the land. Sometimes only the government has the ability to make the hard choices.
A. (Burkett) Louisiana wetlands are privately owned. Benefits of restoring the wetland aren't gained by the people that owned the land. Shrimp come in and out on tides, a land owner who restores his land doesn't get all the shrimp. Benefits of restoring the coast go to the city and the nation and the public. Private land owners may be able to lease land for duck hunting or camping.
A. (Thomas) Ownership comes out of mineral rights. That's where the money is. 90% of land privately owned by families or companies. Trying to set up Louisiana Wetland Trust so owners can donate surface rights to trust, but maintain mineral rights. Trust would manage surface areas. Right now, private interests own it and look at what it has become.



8:35pm
Amy Harmon. Discussing the Greco family from Delacroix Island - son chosing to become a fisherman in the family tradition. Will be the first full fishing season this year. Their story demonstrates why traditions for fisheries are important, and where America gets its seafood.

(New York Times video)

Today most Americans eat farm raised seafood from overseas. Only 5% of shrimp eaten in America is wild caught in American waters.

Buddy and Aaron signed up to help lay boom and clean up oil, which allowed Aaron to buy his own boat.

Prices of wild shrimp have been falling for decades.

(Back to the talk)

NYT sent many reporters to the Gulf for the oil spill. Image that sticks in everyone's mind was the underwater oil gusher. Media wrote a great deal about the gusher. "Everyone" writing about threatened livlihood of Gulf coast fishing industry.

Editor wanted a "narrative" a story that followed certain individuals. Harmon came to Gulf, met up with a photographer who was already working on a photo essay, and then met up with Aaron and Buddy. Aaron was 19 and could have chosen another profession or college, but chose to become a fisherman even though millions of gallons of oil and dispersant were threatening his ability to pursue his chosen livlihood.

Editors may have been looking for a story of lives ruined by oil, but she found one of the last vestiges of American life.

8:20pm
Cynthia Sarthou and the Gulf Restoration Network. Four priority issues: clean and healthy water; protected species; Gulf future post oil disaster; defend wetlands.

Focus on impacts of oil & gas industry to state of Louisiana. By 1980, LA had lost 46% of its wetlands, 8.8 million acres. Problem for New Orleans. Bigger problem for Houma and Thibbodeaux.

Causes of wetland loss.

Started in 1927 when USACE adopted "levees only" policy. Levees from St. Louis to mouth of Mississippi kept river water out of wetlands. Spring floods had renourished coast.

Oil and Gas Development has cut 10,000 miles of canals cut into environment starting in the 1940's. Canals were necessary to extract oil. As pipelines were built, mud dredging created small levees that cut off wetlands from water (spoil banks). Web of waterways allowed salt water to move from Gulf into salt-sensitive freshwater wetlands. LA has lost 40 - 60% of wetlands due to these canals.

Urban development in the wetlands - slab on grade housing. Deforestation - cypress mulch is created by cutting down forests. Agricultural use.

Then came the BP disaster. Estimate 5 square miles of direct damage to wetlands. No good options to clean up. Raking the marsh destroys marsh. Air cannons used to keep wildlife out of the marsh. Beach cleaning disrupting beach life. Uncertain that cleaning oil is actually helping.

Oil and gas canals still being built and dredged. Back filling oil canals would stop indirect destruction. $14 - 50 billion will be required to fix wetlands.

How do you ask America to fix something state isn't willing to fix itself? Oil and gas industry needs to be held accountable. Not going to stop drilling, but it will require industry to clean up after itself. Oil companies need to give a percentage of revenues to Louisiana to restore wetlands.

Restoring the Coast:

River diversions - reintroducing river and sediments. Need to capture sediment of the river and put it into the wetlands. Pipeline sediment delivery, increase connection to river and new sediment.

Multiple lines of defense strategy for communities. Infrastructure and houses need to be elevated. Creation of healthy wetlands. Have to effectively evacuate. Learn to live with flooding. Has been "adopted" by State of Lousiana but not implemented.

Current assault on coast by oil industry not the first assault, just the latest. But oil industry is part of this community, and needs to start acting like it.

7:50pm
Dr. Virginia Burkett on Climate Change.

Climate change has been happening throughout the geologic record. There is a regularly occuring cycle of CO2 increase, temperature increases, followed by decreases.

Over a period of last 150 years, CO2 has increased beyond all records in the geologic record.

Cycles tend to correlate to the elliptical orbit around the sun. Orbital eccentricity affects temperatures on earth.

Past 10,000 years, temperature of planet has been relatively stable. This is when civilization as we know it developed. This is also when coastline that we recognize developed. Including the Mississippi Delta formation.

Over the last 100 years, C02 increased 35%, methane increased 150% compared to pre-industrial levels. Atmospheric water vapor increases - increased volume and intensity of rainfall, but the time between rainfall has increased. Temperature of the ocean has increased, hurricane activity has increased, ocean acidity has increased, and global sea level has risen (1.7 mm/year during the 20th Century; 3.1 mm/yr during 1993 - 2003). Gulf Coast sea level rise has occurred even faster than the global average.

Future changes in temperature based on emissions - all models predict warming at different rates. Expecting fewer frost days, increase in heat waves, and an increase in growing season. Canada will have a longer growing season. Precipitation expected to increase as well as increase of dry days - spacing between rain events.

Nutria increasing range due to milder winters. Increase of invasive species. Chinese tallow is pretty, but it isn't good for local wildlife.

In the South, less rainfall in the Spring and Summer growing seasons, more rainfall in the Fall.

As you heat water, it expands. Ice cover decreases. Sea level rise will accellerate as water becomes warmer.

Greenland ice sheet disintegration would raise sea levels 6-7 meters.

Louisiana coast already sinking. Add subsidence and sea level rise.

Lower soil moisture leads to intense, frequen and widespread wildfires. Brown marsh events due to low fresh water inflows and increased evaporation speed marsh degredation and erosion. Bald cypress become stressed at higher salinity levels; loss of bald cypress increases erosion and removes natural protection from hurricanes. Old cypress swamps become open water.

Land loss will accellerate based on environmental stress. Expecting to see increase of water intrusion onto human infrastructure. Threshold of community sustainability will be crossed in low-lying areas.

Things that can be done to reduce affects of climate change. Mitigaton & Adaption. Reduce non-climate stressors: canal cuts. Reduce catastrophic fires. Prevent and control non-native species. Maintain connected, genetically diverse fish & wildlife populations so they can adapt to change.

Adapt infrastructure - raise houses. Do not rely on historical projections without considering climate change in fish and wildlife management. Adjust harvest models for fisheries. Establish corridors for species migration. Retreat from low-lying coastal zones; in some areas retreat is not cost effective, however. Factor understanding of natural processes.

Focus on water - with more intense droughts water becomes more valuable. Stop damage to coast, put Mississippi back into the Delta. Sediment is vital to health of Louisiana's coast. More dynamic view of systems. Education.




7:45pm
Dr. Thomas starts off with some of the facts on the ground. 11 people dead; 6 million gallons of oil, 1.8 million gallons of dispersant; the spill happened in one of a few spawning grounds for blue fin tuna; human health is degenerating without much empirical data; we have no idea how much oil still remains in the environment or how long it will be there.

It is frustrating to keep saying "we don't know." Thought we would have seen 2 feet of oil coming miles into the marsh. That didn't happen. But we aren't sure what did happen.

How do we plan for a future accident?

Louisiana's economy is dependent on shipping, fishing, and the petrochemical industry.

Explore 3 aspects of the health of Gulf of Mexico

1. Affects of Climate Change
2. Effects on Environment
3. Impact of Oil Gusher on Local Citizens

7:40pm
The room is still about a third empty. This is a good turnout for a panel at Loyola (it is more robust than the New Orleans education panel I came to recently), but the topic is the damn oil spill. You'd think with emotions so high about this issue, it would be standing room only.

This event is sponsored by the Center for the Study of New Orleans, the Center for Environmental Communication, the Environmental Studies Program, and the Women's Studies Program.

Loyola President Kevin Wildes, S.J., is introducing the panel. These forums are designed to elevate discourse on urgent issues on our time. Wildes mentioned impacts on human and environmental health, as well as regional dependency on dangerous industry.

Dr. Burkett is an expert on climate change. Amy Harmon has been covering the oil spill since it happened. Cynthia Sarthou and her partners filed a lawsuit against the EPA because of the use of dispersant chemicals.

7:30pm
People are still filing into their seats. There are two video cameras recording the proceedings. Many, many faculty in attendance; a bunch of students. Some individuals who live on the Gulf Coast made it up. I know because I was behind them as they showed up and introduced themselves to the moderator as such. You could hear Southeast Louisiana in their voices.

Indirect Subsidy

BP's going to get out of paying millions in taxes because they took a loss while nickel & dime-ing the Gulf cleanup and holding onto payments to those affected by their oil spill.

That was some shakedown, all right.

.

The Big Secret

The national media likes to report the confusion of scientists trying to find out "Where's the Oil?" one year later. (Guess where!) Folks on the Gulf Coast are facing medical problems that threaten lives, and you hardly hear a word.

Outside of The Houma Courier, The Daily Comet and The Tri-Parish Times, their stories exist solely on blogs and Facebook — unless you visit Al Jazeera English, or sources in Germany, Belgium and elsewhere in Europe. A Swiss TV crew asks me why U.S. media aren't talking about this. It's a good question.

If there was ever a thing that would make you lose almost all faith in the ability of the national media to investigate news and inform the American people what is really going on in their country, living in Southeast Louisiana in the last 5 years or so should do the trick.

.

"Who Are You Giving Money To?"

Jeffrey posted a roundup before I did.

Gulf Coast residents were arrested while trying to shakedown a BP shareholder's meeting.

I mean, this is such a big shakedown, the Mississippi Attorney General is now gettin' in on the act. You all know about those liberal, anti-business Attorneys General in Mississippi? Just following orders from the Kenyan-Anti-Colonialist In Charge, really. Shaking down the companies that create jobs.

But to answer the serf's individual's question, "Who are you giving money to?" The answer is simple: the money went to the "spillionares."

Of course it did. After the Road Home and now this, disaster affected residents of Louisiana can rest easy knowing that the levees may leak, the oil platforms may explode, but the money-traps - located between the coffers and the residents in need of aid - are working just fine. But I bet the rest of the country is going to get mad at folks down in this part of the world because, even after $20Billion in shakedown money, people down here still have the nerve to complain.

As far as the environment, the water, and the food that comes out of the water, that isn't working so well at all. A lot of right-wingers call environmentalists "tree huggers" as if humans aren't affected by crap dumped into the air, water, or food.

.

Fear & Cartooning

Recognize the format of this video? They're riffing off a powerful information transmitter to spread a culture of fear.

Because, really, that was some shakedown?

Not to mention the fact that, it AIN'T EVEN BEEN A YEAR, and they're already back to drilling.

And spilling.

.