LyrArc Article Gist
One of the authors of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology study cited by president Trump, John Reilly, says president Trump in citing the MIT study showed " a complete misunderstanding of the problem." Reilly's view is that even the Paris accords are not enough, that it is one step, in his words "an incredibly important step," without which the next step cannot be taken. His view is also that the Trump White House may not be listening, so MIT does not plan to reach out to correct this view.

LyrArc Article Gist
Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif's PML-N party wins 125 of 269 seats in Pakistan's parliament. The Tehreek-e-Insaf party of Imran Khan won 31 seats and the PML-N party of the current president Asif Zardari won 32 seats mostly in Sindh province. Independents won 31 seats and some of these independents are likely to support Sharif in forming a new government. Election turnout of 60% showed a large degree of enthusiasm in this election and hopes for economic revival in Pakistan. The focus of Sharif will be on improving the economy, tackling electricity shortages, and building infrastructure. Sharif promised to pursue peaceful relations with India and Afghanistan, and keep the focus on the economy. Sharif and his advisers are bringing a new deftness in the dealings with the Army, the Pakistan Taliban, saying he would call for a halting of drone strikes, limiting the role the U.S. plays in the region, both positions popular in Pakistan, separating differences with former president Musharraf from the institutional role of the military. Small business owners and large business support Sharif's efforts to tackle electricity shortages, with an estimated loss of $12 billion in idled factories alone. The long period of political conflicts between the military, the judiciary and the political parties have led to neglect of Pakistan's economy, as neighboring countries in Asia surged ahead. The realization that popular pressure for improving standards of living and the economic opportunities are both huge has led to an extraordinary election, and put Sharif at the centre of an important new beginning for Pakistan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What oil prices are doing to the redistribution of wealth across the globe. How rich and poor countries are coping. Money going to gasoline is still only 4% of disposable income of U.S. households and the USA hasn't lost its addiction to large vehicles, though there has been a moderate shift to smaller cars and SUV's. Chinese demand keeps growing. Fuel Economy standards are only now being changed and few alternatives are emerging quickly enough to make a difference in the short run. Though a worldwide recessionary climate could change things, no major change is expected. Airlines and the auto industry will be the most affected industries. Global warming and CO2 emissions will be a factor in evaluating how well these alternative are working. With oil and gas prices high, unfortunately coal use is increasing both in China and elsewhere. And ethanol hasn't won popularity because it uses up scarce resources of land, water and energy. A big change is the shift to most of the action going to government oil companies of developing countries, which are much larger now and have the resources to handle what the oil majors did before. Western oil service companies are working with government oil companies bringing access to technology....

LyrArc Article Gist
Results of a CBS New York Times Poll of 1018 adults in the U.S., reported Feb 28, 2006. Results show 55% showed support for gasoline tax if it reduced dependence on foreign oil, 59% showed support if it also reduced global warming. There is additional support if the money is used to fight terrorism, allocated to specific projects such as electric cars, or help low income people with extra gasoline costs. The important distinction in the results is what respondents were asked. When told about their response to a gasoline tax 85% of respondents opposed it, but when told it would reduce dependence on foreign oil 55% support it. Some respondents want to see it earmarked so that its use would reduce dependence on foreign oil through fuel efficiency improvements. The gasoline tax has remained at 18.4 cents a gallon since 1993. Politicians see the 85% and stay away from the issue and at periods of higher oil prices there is more concern about the impact on consumers. Prof. Borenstein, director of an energy institute at the University of California, Berkeley, says his calculations show a 10% increase in gasoline cost would reduces consumption by 6-8%. As the tax is regressive by putting a higher burden on low income consumers, this should be offset by income tax relief that would make middle and lower income people better off , says Prof. Borenstein. Some of the revenues would be used to support projects at automakers and research universities to develop more fuel efficient technologies for automobiles. Shows support is there if the tax and where money is spent is shaped in the right way....

LyrArc Article Gist
Many of the 255 Comments on this article in the NYT say it is misleading or grossly misleading title. Michael Crowley of NYT quotes Wertheim for his conclusion that there seems to be a sense that the world is out of control, there is chaos under president Biden. This is subtly presented and clearly wrong. Wertheim is the author of a book that questions America's exceptionalism, and says "isolationism" was somehow concocted by policy makers such as Eisenhower and Dulles, both Republicans for a postwar world built on American supremacy. What Crowley and Wertheim do is put their very idea of asking questions about policy which is a part of the discussion into misrepresenting through misinformation about what happened. Biden has acted with courage to close wars no other president not Reagan/ Rumsfeld who started the conflict with Iran by arming Iraq's unprovoked war on Iran, not Bush who initiated the war in Afghanistan, not Obama and Trump who did not close the war in the mountains around Kabul that is a "graveyard for Empires" - the Maratha Empire in India in the 1700's that opened the door to British rule in India, not the British Empire wisely staying out of it, the Soviet Union beginning its decline there, and the US mired in it similar to the Soviets. Crowley/Wertheim are only making things worse- Netanyahu was emboldened by the former president and made a major security failure. Putin miscalculated in Ukraine, Biden simply acted in the way any wise American president would -strengthened NATO with Finland and Sweden, providing reasons for Russian restraint yet without escalating the conflict. To say this is chaos is to misinform and misrepresent, and favor the very Supremacy that former president Trump proposes as policy based on US power. By contrast Biden' approach is peace through strength from building close relations between partners in Europe and Asia, not provocation or supremacy. Wertheim is only one voice in a larger discussion not the authority he is presented as. For Wertheim to say "isolationism" was a bogey and point to 1950 as the point when it was created is simply wrong. It existed in some form from the early days of the Republic. Washington was an advocate of not involving the fledgling Republic in foreign entanglements of France even though it was an ally. It is not that response to isolationism is the cause of America embracing the role of leading the Free World as it is now. It is simply the situation leaders faced. Truman faced it when Soviets planned insurgencies in Turkey and Greece which would not exist as democracies today without Truman. And across Eastern Europe Hungary 1956 Ike acted cautiously. Czechoslovakia 1968 LBJ Johnson acted cautiously already in the wrong war with Vietnamese nationalism.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Zalmay Khalizad, a former diplomat to Iraq, reports from Iraq after discussions with prominent Iraqis, describes the state of U.S. relations with Iraq under the Abadi government. He says the Ayatollah Sistani in Iraq prime minister Abadi, and Iraqi public opinion, now favor improved relations with the U.S. following the sectarianism promoted by prime minister Maliki and Iran's expanded role in Iraq. Other reports show Iraqi opinion in transition as the U.S. withdrawal promoted by Maliki has led to 2 million refugees, and huge dislocation of people with the expansion of Islamic State from Syria into Iraq. The change in opinion is also towards promoting better relations with Sunni countries. People in the region do not see a bright future with an increase in religious tensions that only lead to more destructive behaviours and increase in refugees. Towards the end of the Bush administration there was some hope that Iraq would see a bright future, only to see this reversed under Maliki's sectarian policies. U.S. public opinion has shifted away from any involvement following the failure of the people in the region to resolve differences and live peacefully. The cost of the wars with little gained as a result of the failure of the people in the region to work together in the common interest is a part of the public debate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. Sectarianism in the region is the root cause of the growth of the Islamic State and the expansion of the war in Syria, and this has not only worsened the situation for the people in the region, delayed economic development given large oil resources, and left the region worse off than before. It has also led to the refugee flow into Europe worsening the situation in the European Union, adding to tensions in European societies such as France, Germany, Denmark and Sweden, following terrorist attacks and political parties promoting fear of immigrants. What started as a U.S. response to terrorism originating in this region in New York, followed by the war in Iraq, has led to more convulsions in this region, a huge number of refugees, whole country populations displaced, and requires a fresh rethinking about what people in the region can do to live and work together and promote the peaceful participation of people in their own development and growth, before Western societies consider further involvement. The statement about lost to Iran in the title also suggests framing of statements in the old way that are the root of the problem. When the dust settles years from now Iranians, Iraqis, Saudis, Yemeni, Turkish, Pakistani, Indian and other Muslim societies may want to look back at this period as reflecting the dangers of getting caught up in the geopolitics of world powers, letting religious sentiment override calmer thinking, and reflect on the brighter aspects of the common Islamic heritage in Iran, Turkey, India, expressed humanly as it is always is in different ways and forms. They can also take hope and confidence in the fact that European societies have struck the same rocks and emerged calmer, wiser, and better than before....

LyrArc Article Gist
Obama's Cairo speech to the Muslim world on June 4, 2009. He tried to reach out to the Muslim world. Did not use the term terrorism but used instead "violent extremism." He emphasized that most of the differences between the Muslims and the West can be eased by "a sustained effort to listen to each other, to learn from each other, to respect one another, and to seek common ground. " As one Arab leader put it, its a fresh voice only a short while after some were talking about the "clash of civilizations." He also avoided the idea of us vs they of the Bush administration, of moderates allied with the USA and the extremists gouped together with Iran. He called the denial of the Holocaust as "baseless, ignorant and hateful." And touched on the problems facing the people of the Middle East who were trying to find a voice in their own countries. See the link to Iran's election debate between Moussavi and Ahmadinejad in which Moussavi described Ahmadinejad's denial of the Holocaust as underminig Iran's dignity and harming its standing with the rest of the world. Obama's reference to his own personal encounter with Islam in his life, and being the American President, has to have created a climate in which Moussavi could engage in the intense debate with Ahmadinejad and win conservatives over to his side. Moussavi said Ahmadinejad had "exhibitionist, extremist, superficial, adventurist, foreigh policies," based on "illusional perceptions" that the US, Israel, France and the West were collapsing....

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump signs an executive order on March 28, 2017, reversing the American commitment to the Paris climate change agreement. The executive order also lifts a moratorium on the sale of coalmining leases on federal lands. The Obama administration 2015 clean power plan was designed to restrict greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. It was blocked by courts in 2016. Trump says he is reversing president Obama's war on coal. Earlier he approved the Keystone pipeline for bringing oil from oil sands in Canada to the U.S.. Under the Paris agreement the U.S. agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions 26-28% by 2025 from 2005 levels. Market changes including the availability of cheap natural gas from technology advances fracking and hydraulic fracturing is leading a shift away from coal, apart from Obama administration regulations. Another factor is the long term trend towards cleaner energy, with large energy producers such as American Electric Power and other companies planning for the long term which is likely to be in the direction of cleaner energy. These companies see the Trump administration changes as a situation that may not be for the long term. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Following the executive order by U.S. president Trump reversing Obama administration policies on climate change and clean energy, BBC correspondent points out that the strategy of the Trump administration and Republicans is to change the narrative to job creation and with court challenges let the Clean Power plan be delayed. This would be followed by a different plan with less regulation of the coal industry. The clean energy policies were unpopular in states where Republicans had support.

LyrArc Article Gist
Entergy is still short of the over half a billion dollars needed to close each of the aging nuclear plants in Vermont and at Indian Point in New York.

LyrArc Article Gist
Report from the ground giving an unbiased account by a captain in the army who served tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. He spent 7 months as aspecial advisor to the NATO director of communications. He avoide the official tours through the countryside and tried to see and hear what ordinatry Afghans were saying. He says the outbursts against the corruption in the Karzai government reveal a level of distrust that is so great that it greatly diminishes the credibility of the American effort in Afgahnistan, and increases the difficulties of the mission there. He suggests ombudsmens committees to handle complaints of corruption, and the withholding of funds to districts and government agencies that do not meet transpanrency and accountability goals.

LyrArc Article Gist
A strong U.S. jobs report in July with 255,000 new jobs, unemployment at 4.9%, provides positive sentiment going forward. The Federal Reserve is likely to be wary of raising rates because businesses are hiring but are not making the investments needed to spur economic growth, which remains at about 1%. The labor force participation rate is now at 62.8%. The measure of unemployment and underemployment shows a better picture of how different age groups are faring including the 25-54 years age group- this is at 9.7% in July 2016, it was 9.6% in June 2016. This measure shows those working part time because they cannot find a full time job. The market today is stronger for those with the right job skills, but not across the spectrum for all Americans, only setting the stage for further progress and increasing investment as confidence improves.

LyrArc Article Gist
India and China agree to a legally binding deal on climate change and emissions that would be drafted by 2015, and take effect in 2020. This would bring them in line with or symmetrical with the U.S. and European countries for controlling emissions.

LyrArc Article Gist
The India-Pakistan-Afghanistan issues are still framed in the old way in terms of communalism, cold war then and the war on terrorism now. These policies were a legacy of the colonial policies of an earlier empire designed to preserve foreign rule, with a policy of perpetuating divisions between communties on religious and other lines. Modernization, the spread of mass communications that makes possible the reduction of prejudice and division by assimilating different values and beliefs into acommon aspiration for progress and better living standards, and the spread of education, commerce, and technological progress, create the conditions that should put this behind us. Put behind us communalism, and the political and military structures of communal states. Pakistan needs to be transformed from a communal state with a military structure designed to preserve that state - resulting in conflicts with its neighbors- into a state that represents a community and a religion, but in all other ways seeks peaceful coexistence and economic integration with the rest of South Asia. A good example of this is Mexico with its own culture, language and religion (Spanish Catholicism), and Canada with its own bilingual French-English heritage and British political structures and allegiances, both arriving at an arrangement of peaceful coexistence and economic integration with the USA with its different political structures and culture and sporadic conflicts with Canada and Mexico. This has promoted the peaceful development of the North American region. The US involvement in the region can then be seen as a misguided effort that continued framing the region's differences in the old British way or in a cold war stereotyping, first with John Foster Dulles in the India-Pakistan conflicts, and then with Reagan in the Afghan anti-Soviet war. This has worked to exacerbate the conditions that led to slow progress in the drive for economic development, infrastructure building and modernization in all of South Asia. Just as in Europe, as in North America, the processes of economic development work best when a policy of inclusiveness and integration of different communities and people is followed. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ report a top American Defense Department official before resigning says- "I have no problem with feeding China or trading with China. I have a problem with arming China." Advanced or sensitive manufacturing technology is still being approved for export to China says this report in WSJ, even as the US perceives this to be a national security threat. Experts say the Commerce Department report approval process needs overhaul and the US needs close coordination with the European Union on this process. Of the total US $124 billion in exports to China in 2020 only half of one percent needed a license Commerce Department data reviewed by WSJ shows. Of that small fraction of one half percent Commerce Department approved 2562  applications or 94%. This even includes array of semiconductors, aerospace components, artificial intelligence technologies that could be added to China's military. This means that even towards the end of the Trump administration with its talk about national security threats, through the four years 2016-2020, nothing much happened in this important field.  The difficulty that the Trump administration faced and America faces is putting company and business interests first or American security interests and retaining competitive technological advantage interests first. American administrations and business have consistently failed to follow what plain ordinary Americans understand by America first. Even when it is clearly evident that America is handing over sensitive advanced technologies with very little in return, and creating out of nowhere competition that poses serious risks for the national interest, business and administrations operate indifferent to the national interest. Even right into the period when this is making the world a riskier and more dangerous place.   This is the state of affairs today, and the situation is not about Congressmen visiting Taiwan or ships going through the seas in that region, or international law. All that is American policy  and is well known and well understood. What is missing is the right action and the right determination behind other action that is sending a different message at the same time -that the US is oblivious to its own interests. That administrations, even those such as the recent Republican one under Mr. Trump, see a higher priority in following American business wherever it goes in pursuit of individual company interests alone, even if it does not accord with the national interest. Lobbying groups distort what policy should be in the public interest and in the interest of both countries, leading to a breakdown in the whole process itself whenever governments surrender their role of protecting the public interest.  Outshoring manufacturing was bad economically at the level of communities across the US, leading to divisions that weakened the country in the last decade, it was also bad for the economy of the country with loss of the best manufacturing jobs, beyond what economists in their ignorance of the big picture sought to show was the consumer- often the same person who lost a job or stopped seeking work- paying less. It was bad also for China as it created the hyper growth that rapidly contaminated land, air and water and created an inherently unstable relationship in trade with destruction of jobs at a pace that America had not faced with Japan and with which it could not cope. Could a pace that worked for both nations have worked? At the root is the notion that business knows best even if it is in plain sight to every plain American that the country's most advanced technologies are being shipped out. Governments do not fulfill their responsibilities and fail when they fail to tell business what rules are in the public interest, as it was never in the first role of business to protect the public interest. That the European Union has simply followed the US in this has created a problem for both the US and the European Union of deviating from what plain Americans or Europeans see as abundantly clear.  Even in plain dollars and cents business and economists fail to grasp the true cost for the whole country or whole people compared to the benefit for an individual or an individual company. The cost of wars even small wars can be be trillions of dollars which are borne by the whole country or people, and most of it by the middle and less economically well off classes in a country. Creating a belligerent competitor in world affairs and the risk of conflict and war is to lose trillions of dollars when the benefit to an individual, groups, or individual companies is no more but a tiny fraction of that trillion dollar cost, not including what all the plain people pay in human lives. It is not that anyone benefits as the people in the belligerent competitor country follow the same pattern of loss that would happen in the US. One should ask is it not a loss for China also? The example of Imperialist Japan is not so far off in time for Americans or Asians including the Chinese and Japanese people who suffered so greatly to forget. Business remains oblivious to the public interest not just for America but for the world, individual companies do not see it as their role beyond that of pursuing individual company interest. Is it not then for the government to set the rules. Is it alright for government to not fulfill its responsibilities? Even when this pushes the world faster to into conflicts as technologies take the place of exercise of wisdom in conflict, and even when there are unmet challenges such as climate change that affect the whole planet.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Fathers reviews two detailed accounts of Mao's Great Leap Forward. From 1958-62 Mao launched an effort to industrialize China in its effort to surpass Krushchev's effort to surpass the U.S. and western nations in one decade. Yang Jingsheng's account in the book 'Tombstone,' is a result of decades of research to find what happened during this period. He lost his own father to starvation during this period when all Chinese agriculture was forced into communes with communal living and communal kitchens. The result were disastrous as agricultural production suffered badly leading to famines and loss of an estimated 45 million lives. The policy was continued even as the result showed a looming disaster by 1959. It was only by 1962 that Mao was forced to accept the failure of the program. As an editor of Xinhua news agency, Jingsheng had access to accounts of waht happened in provincial documents and archives. The other book reviewed is 'The Great Famine' by Frank Dikotter which provides an illuminating account of what happened in these years. Dikotter says the final responsibility rested with Mao for calling for higher grain deliveries from the countryside at the height of the famine and for continuing the policy of force and coercion leading to starvation- he quotes Mao who said: "It is better to let half the people die so that the other half can eat their fill." The truth about this period was hidden by propaganda and the mistake accounts of westerners who visited China including Francois Mitterand till the 1990's. Jasper Becker, a former correspondent in China for the Guardian, gave one of the first accounts of what had happened in "Hungry Ghosts: China's Secret Famine" (1996). What shocked readers was the extent of the dead, the violence, and the fear of speaking out even after 30 years. The fear of speaking out is evidenced in the pen name Mo Yan of the Nobel prize winner in Literature for 2012 which means do not speak out in Chinese because his parents were from a more affluent farming family in the village. Mo Yan uses animal and fairy tale characters and Chinese history in his novels and stories including his effort to describe the behaviour of arrogant local officials. The chronology of this period also tells a story. China's Communists took control in 1949, the famine and violent repression to establish the commune system occured in 1958-1962 only 8 years later, and the Great Proleterian Cultural Revolution was launched by Mao in 1966 and was to last a decade till his death in 1979- a period which saw a new effort of upending of China's countryside to establish communism....

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist points out that the last thing President Obama needs - when he has serious domestic and foreign policy goals- is another Vietnam. Just as Bush's presidency was seriously affected by Iraq, Obama's presidency it says would be seriously affected by Afghanistan. And the Economist emphasizes as General Chrystal's chief conclusion: "an insurgency cannot be defeated by aforeign army alone." It points to General Chrystal's view that success means winning the support of the people, and the loss of faith in the government of Karzai. Obama and Biden will have noted this as they have growing doubts of their own about the widespread fraud seen in the Afghan election. Ground reports from Afghanistan support this assessment about acomplete loss of support for the Karzai government. See Intelilinks.

LyrArc Article Gist
General McChrystal gets the support he is looking for against the Taliban in Afghanistan, as Gates, Obama and Clinton, make the decision to continue backing the Karzai government, even though it is very unpopular and the ground reports suggest that this would be amistake. It was NATO that announced the support because the Obama administration had deep concerns about the Karzai government. The US and the UN representative Kai Eide wanted to see arunoff for the elections but the "assumption" that he would be reelected suggests the Obama administration, the UN representative, and the UK and Canadian foreign ministers in ameeting have decided to continue the war in Afghanistan on Karzai's side.

LyrArc Article Gist
The astounding fact in this French FR24 report on the Paris Climate Change Agreement and country carbon emissions show that China's emissions accelerated to rise 3 fold in 2015 to about 12 billion tons of carbon emissions from about 4 billion in 2000. US remains at about 6 billion. India is at about 3 billon tons of carbon emissions, about where China was in 2000 when it had about 4 billion tons of carbon emissions. This is shown in the graph on carbon emissions from FR24. The US, European Union graph curves on tons of carbon emissions since 2000 are all flat or declining, India rising slowly from a small base, China's curve is rising straight up from a large enough base at an unbelievable and dangerous rate. What has happened and is it getting worse? China's economy expanded too quickly as globalization was accelerated by banks, and business in the US and Europe, and by the Chinese governments at the local level and the state level. This had negative consequences for US, Europe and China. The too fast growth in China at rates of 10-15% based solely on False GDP indicators that did not take into account damage to the environment and workers was that it hurt manufacturing and working class in US and Europe and contaminated the environment. This was not like growth of Japan in 1960-1980, a smaller country in the way it affected the US and European working classes. Hyper Growth at 10-15% of a large country with 1 billion people compressed over a short period, is cited by Greg Ip in the WSJ as the cause of the negative impact on America.  It hurt China through pollution of rivers and land at an accelerated pace. It hurt China as trade with US and Europe became unsustainable with the loss of manufacturing in the US and Europe leading to a trade war. From these graphs of emissions it now appears that the 3 fold rise in carbon emissions from about 4 billion tons in 2000 to about 12 billion tons in 2015 is the result of unregulated business activity of all those who preferred to push hyper growth in China purely for reasons of profit such as investment banks and corporations in US, Europe, and state or local companies in China.  This has also aggravated inequality in US, Europe and China, and hurt rural populations. Xi Jinping is attempting to correct this in China, Biden is trying to correct this in the US, and Scholz will now attempt to correct this in Germany and the European Union. It is also to be noted that China in 2000-2015 did not have the benefit of the newer technologies that India now has access to, which is why India says it is able to reduce carbon emissions per each unit of GDP by 35% from 2005 levels by 2030. It is this efficiency in producing units of GDP with newer and newer technologies that China lacked in its period of hyper growth 2000-2015 that now looks to have hurt China- with overflow of highly polluting steel mills and other factories which it would prudently and wisely have cut back on. Looking back at this period one sees the wholesale transfer of highly polluting plants in Germany being sold and put up in China, a poor developing country in 2000. Was this a good decision for Germany or for China? In this way the banks and large corporations in the US and Europe who use economic indicators that are limited such as dollar profits, without overall indicators that include negative effect damage to the environment that requires huge investments to correct, problems of trade wars leading to political conflicts, are acting like a person walking blindly in one direction.  With some foresight China and all its trading partners would have done better with slower but more careful Chinese growth of 7-8% that would have better met societal goals in US, Europe and China, avoiding high carbon emissions segments of industries from Day 1. Jinping is doing this in China, and Biden is doing this in the US- cutting out highly polluting factories and segments of industries- but in a climate of mutual distrust, which could have benefitted the world when conducted in a climate of cooperation and trust. The pandemic made the situation even more difficult. Power shortages in factories and blackouts in Chinese cities have led to a reversal of policies on use of coal in China months before the COP26 Glasgow conference and G-20 summit leaving a huge gap. Without the presence of Xi Jinping at COP26 in Glasgow and with Chinese participation uncertain significant progress on climate change is elusive. Estimates by US Renewable Energy Agency is that it would cost $131 trillion to pay for limiting emissions to global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Some major share of this cost can be attributed to the increase from about 4 billion tons in 2000 of carbon emissions in China to about 12 billion tons in 2015, increase by 3 times. One can clearly see from this sudden jump in carbon emissions in China that policies of hyper growth with unregulated polluting industries adding to GDP growth figures was bad policy for China, bad policy for US, and Europe, even if it offered temporary profits for individual companies. India has the advantage of learning from this experience and charting its own wiser course as a partner with US, Europe and Japan and by Modi's vigorous efforts in renewable energy. The lesson- look at all indicators of progress, including climate and society, not just economic indicators in profit or dollar terms, take the tough decisions early in regulating polluting companies and industry segments, and bring full and active public participation with transparent access to data on climate damaging activity in real time because climate and the environment we live in free of polluting substances belongs to all the people, belongs to all life on the planet from trees to animals and birds, not companies that can choose to ignore it. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Under new proposed changes carbon emissions permits would be sold to industry and heavier polluters would have to pay more. And to make it fair to European companies exporters in other countries like China would have to buy these carbon permits to be able to export to Europe. There is similiar discussion about this in the USA which expects caps on greenhouse gas emissions in a few years. These changes wouldn't go into effect till 2013 at the earliest and industry will be trying to create a level playing field by then. Countries like China and India because they are developing have been exempt from the greenhouse caps under the Kyoto Protocol which expire 2012. Under the Kyoto Protocol which Europe signed and the USA did not sign, European companies are giving carbon permits free to emit a certain amount of greenhouse gas every year, the heavier polluters have to buy the permits from the ones that pollute less creating an incentive for companies to reduce emisssions.

LyrArc Article Gist
Duke Energy's CEO, Jim Rogers, talks to Charlie Rose about the U.S. nuclear industry and the future for nuclear energy in the aftermath of the nuclear disaster in Japan.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist describes the fraud in the election and the odious group of warlords and crooks that Karzai has pulled together to get support for this election. If they get as reward positions in the ministries then "the war is over" according to one diplomat. And without acredible government the chances are poor for any"good outcomes." Eide, the UN diplomat in the country says ultimately this will be decided not by governments but by people sitting at thier kitchen tables making up their mind as the follow the information in the media. And the President has only 37% of Democrats with him who want to see more troops in Afghanistan in a recent poll.