Category: Environment

Posted on

Silence

“We Indians know about silence. We are not afraid of it. In fact, for us, silence is more powerful than words. Our elders were trained in the ways of silence, and they handed over this knowledge to us. Observe, listen, and then act, they would tell us. That was the manner of living.

With you, it is just the opposite. You learn by talking. You reward the children that talk the most at school. In your parties, you all try to talk at the same time. In your work, you are always having meetings in which everybody interrupts everybody and all talk five, ten or a hundred times. And you call that ‘solving a problem’.

When you are in a room and there is silence, you get nervous. You must fill the space with sounds. So you talk compulsorily, even before you know what you are going to say.

White people love to discuss. They don’t even allow the other person to finish a sentence. They always interrupt. For us Indians, this looks like bad manners or even stupidity. If you start talking, I’m not going to interrupt you. I will listen. Maybe I’ll stop listening if I don’t like what you are saying, but I won’t interrupt you.

When you finish speaking, I’ll make up my mind about what you said, but I will not tell you I don’t agree unless it is important. Otherwise, I’ll just keep quiet and I’ll go away. You have told me all I need to know. There is no more to be said. But this is not enough for the majority of white people.

People should regard their words as seeds. They should sow them, and then allow them to grow in silence. Our elders taught us that the earth is always talking to us, but we should keep silent in order to hear her.

There are many voices besides ours. Many voices…”

-Ella Deloria

[Wisdom from the Original People]

Posted on

Solar Sanity

There is a chance that solar sanity will ultimately be brought to Howard County. A ruling by Howard County Circuit Judge Lynn Murray for or against the development of a 1,800 acre solar field titled “Emerald” by ENGIE, a French multi-national company, is expected sometime in May.



This comes as a result of several Greentown area residents, who own properties adjacent to the prime agriculture land proposed to be covered with solar panels, taking their case to court. They challenged the legality of the approval of the solar project by the Howard County Board of Zoning Appeals on several grounds.

The ENGIE Emerald project had been denied twice earlier by the BZA. In the interim, one Board member who voted “no” was replaced by a Board member who voted “yes”. This member replacement or maneuver was questionable at the time. The final “yes” vote was a 3-2 yes/no vote; so the Board was split even in its final approval vote. Earlier it had been a 3-2 no/yes vote which denied the project.

The primary case for denial of the special exception for a solar field made by adjacent property residents rests in language found in county zoning ordinance itself. Under the Agriculture (AG) District section the Board of Zoning Appeals is directly addressed. The language states, “Board of Zoning Appeals: allow a special exception use (which specifically includes “power generation facility”) only when it is clearly a benefit to the adjacent properties.”

Further, under 7.08 Special Exception language states, “…. will not permanently injure other property or uses in the same district and vicinity….”

Any reasonable person would readily conclude the presence of a 1,800 acre solar field next door would not be “clearly a benefit” to adjacent properties, but would definitely damage adjacent properties in value and likely in physical ways. Judge Murray, however, need only conclude damage would come in the form of lower value for adjacent properties and not “clearly a benefit”. Who, really, would want to live right next to 1,800 acres of solar panels. The case is really simple as should be the decision by Murray.

Then there is yet another solar field proposal by another company to cover about 1,700 acres more of prime agriculture land. So, the decision by Murray is critical.

And as a former newspaper publisher, there remains a nagging question in my mind. That question is whether any local official or citizen, other than the landowners whose fields would be covered with solar panels, had financial gain from BZA approval of ENGIE: Emerald.

Posted on

More Poison: Paraquat!

The EPA is at it again. In an agency draft, it again backs the use of this very toxic herbicide, paraquat, claiming it is safe for use across millions of acres of American cropland despite what public health advocates characterize as virtual scientific proof it causes Parkinson’s disease.


By law, the EPA is required to review pesticides every 15 years. It did and approved paraquat again in 2021. The EPA was sued by several agricultural and public health groups in 2021 charging it had ignored broad scientific consensus linking paraquat to Parkinson’s. The EPA agreed to review its approval. They did and here we are again at the same decision as before. Oh, the EPA did agree it will review more science and could change course when issuing a final report next year. In the meanwhile, the poison stays on the market.

The fight over the use of paraquat in the United States has been going on for decades. This chemical poison, a very effective weed killer, is manufactured by Syngenta. Interestingly, nearly 60 countries have banned paraquat use. This includes the UK and EU countries. Another fact…. A state-owned Chinese company bought Syngenta in 2017 but paraquat is banned for use in China.

Scientific research clearly shows paraquat interferes with dopamine production and regulation, and people with Parkinson’s have reduced dopamine levels. Paraquat is also linked to respiratory damage and kidney disease. Ingestion of a single teaspoon is considered deadly.

And finally, those most at risk seem to be the communities and farmworkers in the central California farming area. This is the area of enormous production of crops for the food market in the United States. It appears the EPA could care less about the communities and workers there as long as Syngenta makes a profit. But even worse is that residues from paraquat likely find their way onto the food we all purchase at the grocery store. I have to wonder how many cases of Parkinson’s have resulted.

In looking back at pesticide use which really began after WWII, it is crystal clear we have not made wise decisions. The first big alert was DDT. Then in Viet Nam during the war there, we covered that country with Agent Orange. That was devastating to Viet Nam and to thousands of US military personnel; even to those in the supply chain that got that chemical from the United States to Viet Nam. When will we wise up? But, again the story is that money talks the loudest!

Posted on

However Delivered: POISON

Reason had a victory. This past week a US federal court in Arizona banned three weed killers (poisons; biocides) widely used by American agriculture, finding the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) broke the law in allowing them to be on the market.

Crop spraying


The ruling affects dicamba-based weed killers produced and sold by Bayer, BASF, and Syngenta. Dicamba killers have been blamed for millions of acres of crop damage and harm to endangered species and natural areas across the Midwest and South.

The court concluded the EPA had not followed law in granting approval of dicamba for use on genetically engineered crops, typically GE soy beans and corn, that were resistant to it use, but killed weeds around them. The problem is that dicamba is very volatile! This means it easily goes up into the air and drifts to areas afar causing widespread damage to crops and vegetation not resistant to the pesticide. Result: unintended consequences… death to vegetation, including crops, elsewhere and death to animals and insects (pollinators, for example) dependent on that vegetation.

All of this comes on the heels of massive law suits against Bayer/Monsanto involving the use of Roundup (glyphosate) pesticide. So far those suits have cost Bayer billions in jury verdicts and settlements. The plaintiffs allege Roundup causes non-Hodgkins lymphoma.
And Syngenta is already facing nationwide litigation over its paraquat herbicide which thousands of plaintiffs claim causes Parkinson’s disease.

Apparently enough lessons have yet to be learned following the debacle with DDT. Rachael Carson in her book “Silent Spring” brought that to headlines. Eventually DDT was banned everywhere. I am thinking the whole use of biocides (pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, etc) on crops needs to severely restricted. We are in the process of poisoning ourselves and the planet.

Of course, all one has to do is follow the money. The creators of the biocides are the same companies that genetically engineer the crops to resist their effect. This means they sell the biocide resistant seeds to create the resistant crops and then sell the poison to put on it. Pretty good racket if you can get by with it. In the meanwhile, you make people and the planet sick. Ask the bees.

Posted on

Why the Osprey….. & Sturgeon

When thinking about the possibility of beginning Substack writing in addition to continuing my WordPress Blog, almost immediately the Osprey came to mind. The art I have used as the logo was by an artist I knew named Don Gabbert from Minnesota. I have kept this art of the Osprey close for over 30 years. It is precious to me.

At the bottom of the Osprey is a saying written by Don. It says, “It’s Our Earth, Too!” That saying really says it all. We are only one of God’s marvelous creatures that call Earth home. Yet, we are the creature that seems to be destroying it.

The Osprey is a raptor: a hunter. Its primary source of food is fish that it catches by diving from air into the water below; something no other raptor can do. Its sight is phenomenal to be able to see fish in water from very high perches above. Its flight is precise. Its goal clear. Ospreys symbolize new beginnings, healing, and cooperation with nature.

And fish…. Almost all of my graduate work at Purdue involved water environments and fish. My doctorate focused on the evolution of Acipencers: the Sturgeon. The sturgeon are estimated to not have changed for millions of years. They are some of the oldest fish species on Earth. I see them as the “Wise Ones”. In Native American mythology, the sturgeon is often seen as a symbol of strength, resilience, and perseverance. In Celtic mythology, the sturgeon was associated with wisdom and knowledge.

So, together, it is my hope that the spirit of both the Osprey and the Sturgeon will guide my way forward.

Posted on

Peoples Osprey

Times change and new opportunities emerge. Substack is new to me, but it sure seems to be a path for me to be able to write what I want when I want. In eons past, I was able to write articles and columns for the Kokomo (IN) Tribune at will. You see, I was part of the family that owned that newspaper. I was either in top management or the CEO/Publisher of this then a 34,000 daily newspaper having about 185 employees and over 300 newspaper carriers. All employees were considered family. Together, we were designated the top newspaper in the USA for penetration (subscribers) of its market for 9 of 10 years running; and second the one odd year. On top of that, we were leaders in new technology in the industry. Times have changed since then…. and not for the good. Many communities now are news deserts without a local newspaper.

I do write a blog and have for many years: kentblacklidge.com. I will continue to post on it, but I have become rather erratic in posting. I know why. I no longer have and have not had the decision authority for decades about what goes into the Kokomo Tribune. Since my family sold the KT, this newspaper has passed through two group owners. It is now owned by a group (CNHI) that editorially is way too far left politically for me. The Managing Editor has published columns I have written from time to time, but I have given up that route. It felt constrained. In recent times, when the KT prints a column with which I disagree strongly, I typically will email the columnist directly. Again, constraint given no one else reads/knows my thoughts and writing directly has resulted in fewer blog posts. Not a good reason, but true.

On a national and state level, I write representatives directly. I intend to continue this but at the same time will post any letters to Substack and my blog. I have things to say even if no one else gives a damn about my opinions.

My interests are wide. I have indicated in Substack I would be particularly interested in politics, government, science, and the environment. These interests are not limited to local issues. They would include local, state, and national matters. And what credentials do I have to write about these areas: four degrees from Purdue University which are a BS Industrial Management, MS Conservation, MS Aquatic toxicology, and a Ph.D. in genetics. Those plus over 20 years in newspaper journalism.

In my opinion, honest and open communications between people is the glue that holds communities and countries together. The major media, print and electronic, in the USA have failed. They largely have become propaganda tools of the political left. It is up to us, individuals, to restore the integrity of news offered to the public. We must. I intend to do my part. The Peoples Osprey on Substack is open.

Kent Blacklidge Ph.D.
(kentblacklidge.com and peoplesosprey.substack.com)

Posted on

Humans

“It took most of human history for our  population to reach 1 billion—and just over 200 years to reach 8 billion. But growth has begun slowing, as women have fewer babies on average. When will our global population peak? And how can we minimize our impact on Earth’s resources, even as we approach 10 billion?” American Museum of Natural History

Now demographers are predicting human population on planet Earth will peak at about 10 billion. That is when birth rates and death rates are predicted to equalize. The big question is whether planet Earth can survive at this level of human beings. In his book, 10 Billion, Dr. Stephen Emmott, who is the head of Computational Research at MicroSoft Research, does not think so.

Emmott summarizes his conclusions on the last two pages of his book. “The biggest and most important experiment on Earth is the one we’re all conducting, right now, on Earth itself. Only an idiot would deny that there is a limit to how many people our Earth can support. The question is, is it seven billion (our current population [which is now 8 billion]) ten billion, or twenty-eight billion? I think we have already gone past it (at 7 billion). Well past it.”

“We could change the situation we are now in. Probably not by technologizing our way out of it, but by radically changing our behavior. But there is no sign that his is happening or about to happen. I think it’s going to be business as usual for us. As a scientist, what to I think about our current situation? Science is essentially organized skepticism. I spend my life trying to prove my work wrong or look for alternative explanations for my results. I hope I’m wrong. But the science points to my not being wrong. “

“As I said at the beginning, we can rightly call the situation we’re in an unprecedented emergency. We urgently need to do — and I mean actually do — something radical to avert a global catastrophe. But I don’t think we will. I think we’re fucked.”

The two most populated countries on Earth are China and India. Chinese population is estimated at a little over 1.4 billion. India’s population is also at a little over 1.4 billion. In comparison, USA population is about 332 million. The continent of Africa population is a little over 1.2 billion and growing. All ten countries with the highest birth rates are African with those in the Middle East being not far behind along with some in South America. And take a look at living conditions in most of those countries. Many at poverty levels.

What happens then? Population number pressure in one area results in pressure to migrate to areas of lower population and higher standards of living. We are seeing this worldwide which is causing major disruptions to countries and cultures. Look at Europe and the USA now. It is happening. The hordes are moving. And unless there is back pressure, it will continue.

Until we face head on the fact that Earth cannot support an ever increasing human population — or even the current population level — the planet is headed for biological collapse. The wisest decision is to find ways to gradually decrease human numbers and consumption levels and natural resource use over time, but no one appears to really take this seriously. Unfortunately, Dr. Stephen Emmott may be right…… “Fucked”.

Posted on

Thought from Jane Goodall

“Here we are, arguably the most intelligent being that’s ever walked planet Earth, with this extraordinary brain, yet we’re destroying the only home we have” Jane Goodall

The beat goes on. We get caught up in the crisis of the day and lose sight of the big picture. All over the planet we have mass migration of people going on. Why? There was a time when people stayed close to where they were born for generations. The natural resources were there to nurture them. Now we see those resources being used up rather than conserved. What happens then. In the past when there was what was perceived as unlimited resources elsewhere, populations just moved to other more resource rich areas. That is no longer possible. Planet wide natural resources are now limited and being used up at alarming rates. We are seeing exactly what happens when a species overshoots what supports it, but in the case of humankind, it is the entire planet. I believe you can conclude what happens eventually.

The biggest issue now seems to be “climate change”. I prefer to call it what it once was: “global warming”, which is a more accurate description of what is happening. The evidence of warming is overwhelming. The questions arise over whether this is part of a natural Earth cycle or is being caused by human activity; specifically the burning of fossil fuels and the creation and release of chemicals that contribute to the capture of solar energy on the planet. My conclusion is that the argument does not matter. We have passed the point of any effective action. The planet is warming and will continue to warm for an indefinite future. Nothing human beings can do will make any difference at this point and certainly the USA alone cannot do anything effective. The hysterical move to electric vehicles is absurd and counter productive. More waste will be created. And where is the electricity going to come from? I do not see any significant moves to modernize the electric grid in the USA and to increase electric generation by some means to replace generation by coal or natural gas. Certainly, solar panels and windmills cannot possibly do the job and they both have significant downsides including environmental damages. So, we are really stuck with global warming and the continued use of fossil fuels to power modern civilization. Hang on.

Jane Goodall is right.

Posted on

The Climate Pandemic [Open Letter]

7-17-2023

Senator Mike Braun
Senator Todd Young
Representative Victoria Spartz

To all:

I am in the midst of reading a book all of you must read. It is “The Climate Pandemic” by Dennis Meredith, a long time and very reputable science writer. He details where we are and how we got there as humans who populate our planet home, Earth. The content is highly referenced.  

The message of the book is devastating. The conclusion is that we, human beings, may have already passed the point of no return regarding the climate and the viability of the natural life support systems that have made living possible for our species. He notes that on Earth, species have come and gone over the millennia. Earth will survive, but the human species may not.   

I hope you or a key person on your staff will take the time to consider the message in “The Climate Change”. I believe it will change your perspective on future decisions and actions.

Thank you for your attention.

Sincerely,
Kent H Blacklidge Ph.D.

Posted on

Supreme Court and EPA Rulings

[Written in response to an editorial in the Kokomo Tribune 6/16/2023]

It is interesting the editorial writer from the Anderson Herald Bulletin does not know basic US law under the Constitution. In the recent editorial in the Kokomo Tribune titled, “Court attacks EPA authority”, the writer clearly makes the assumption the Court has the authority to make law. It does not.

The writer in the first paragraph says, “The US Supreme Court seems to be implementing military tactics in its offensive against the natural environment, attacking first from the air and now from the water”. What? The Supreme Court’s job is to hold the government and us all to within the bounds of legislation passed by the Congress. Nothing more, nothing less.

If there are muddy issues with what current law covers, it is up to Congress to clarify or correct it as an expression of the people. The authority granted the EPA is mostly from the Clean Air and Clean Water acts passed under President Nixon and Republicans long ago.

As one who considers himself an environmentalist from Rachael Carson “Silent Spring” days, I am fully on board with regulations that result in clean air, clean water, and uncontaminated soil. And we have a long, long way to go for those.

The main complaint voiced in the editorial involves the definition of a wetland. Many believed the EPA had itself extended its authority to even mud puddles. The Court did not agree, but limited EPA authority to areas connected to federally protected waterways; an authority granted under law.

The earlier complaint about air quality asked whether the EPA could place state-level caps on carbon emissions. The Court said no under current law. Again, the Court does not make law, it only sets the boundaries of authority under the law. If changes are needed, Congress is the body to make the changes; not the Supreme Court.

So, the editorial writer needs to freshen up on the Constitution before attacking the actions of the US Supreme Court.

Let me repeat… I am an environmentalist or conservationist of decades. I strongly believe in tight, effective laws that correct or prevent environmental degradation. At the same time, I believe such laws must come from the US Congress or State Legislatures and not from regulatory agency proclamation.