Welcome to our Investigations page. Pan Geo Investment Investigations support our independent portfolio investment advisory services. Our current expose of what we call the 83 Dirty Energy countries are shown at the bottom of this webpage in our Eco Table™ along with explanations of pollution problems. Of course, conducting this investigation on an ongoing basis helps us in our green growth investing efforts here at Pan Geo Investment. And directs us away from security issuers that may not be so green and clean, may depend on government or other outside help to soften their environmental externality challenges or may one day face significant environmental liabilities and lawsuits.
If you seek investment advice or further information about Pan Geo Investment Inc. and its services, please click on the links below to view other pages of this website or click on Welcome to go to the beginning here.
Check the marquee banners above and refer to the Performance Page for information about the success of our investment advisory services to date and to view the first part of our 164 country Pan Geo Investment Global Table™. This table also contains direct links to stock market exchanges of these countries, so web surfing investors and interested parties can easily visit them by clicking on the links provided. The 100 countries not currently in our Pan Geo Global Index are shown in the Table portion on our Also Eligible Page.
To Know Your Client Page To OrderAdvice Page
To Welcome Page To Performance Page
To Also Eligible Page To InvestorDataBlock Page
To
Comment
February 17, 2008 - The first draft of the Pan Geo Investment Eco-Table with subtitle The Dirty Thirty was published here on December 9, 2007. Our investigation beginning in the next section below is intended to alert people to various potential environmental hazards and risks. In our own way we are trying to provide an early warning to investors because many of the issues are pervasive. We also want to convey the message that to succeed in the green economy, you need to keep your eye on the pie of the future. These will be the halcyon days; just knowing what change may entail should be hopeful and rewarding not grim and forbidding.
We anticipate this green file will be voluminous and open for a very long time. Why is that? We at Pan Geo Investment believe society has at least a generation, that is a period of time spanning more than 25 years, of enterprising activity ahead related to the issues raised in this investigation. So don't let the findings of this investigation get your goat. There is a world of opportunity ahead for smart, green and clean growth and much to do for gain. The implications arising from our need to prevent further climate change are pervasive. We think it is inevitable there will be a massive business segment rotation of investment funds and human effort, that is capital and labor, coming out of grey, old, polluting, declining, inefficient industries, segments and ways of doing business and a rechanneling of resources into more viable, advanced, sustainable alternatives. Into alternatives that may at first blush seem to cost more until you look carefully at what you're getting and what you are not getting, namely, the quality of it. For example, there are compelling new opportunities arising for builders focused on designing, planning, manufacturing and constructing many different formats of energy efficient houses, apartments, office buildings and warehouses. In this endeavor today, there should be no time for negativity or a downturn in economic activity. It involves a refocusing of effort and resources which we recognize does not happen at the drop of a hat.
Remember, surrounding much of the material presented in this investigation there is apt to be a lot of griping, posturing, disinformation and defending the status quo along the way by some of those connected to the fortunes of now-bygone and soon-to-be bygone economic actors. There may well be rearguard actions and attempts to prevent or forestall a particular transformation from occurring even if it only means salvaging one more pay check for those who may be negatively affected. However, public demand for climate security and environmental protection will mean the vast scope for change will occur and at a rate unprecedented in human history. Of course, considerable retraining, remodeling, revamping, retooling, re-engineering and reinvesting to achieve these ends is already under way in many jurisdictions. But it often involves new people to invest, new advisors, new expertise, new concepts, new workers, new technologies, new markets, new products, new services, new laws, rules and regulations. There's the rub. Some people may have huge problems with "new" and "change" and strenuously resist it instead of embracing and adapting to it.
Being life-long growth investors concentrating on the future, take it from us, there has always been this poignant, overarching, seemingly ever-present phenomenon of the challenging social aspects never mind the physical, technical or environmental ones. Its not so much the research, development and venturesome qualities that pose risks and challenges. Answers will be found not only because many people relish the opportunity to apply themselves diligently in efforts to improve our world and have society progress. Equally challenging though is the thorn in your foot of having to deal many steps along the way with those whose livelihoods, portfolios and incomes are being curtailed, withered away and supplanted by, in this epic case, the clean and green forces of change. Those folks tend to kick up formidable resistance in the face of being "victimized" by progress.
Regardless, there are now crucial issues before us all relating to our environment and the earth that must be solved expeditiously. As our climate changes with unknown ramifications, it may affect the survivability of virtually every species and how well they cohabitate together on what is becoming an overpopulated planet. People should therefore anticipate that tomorrow will not be the same as yesterday. Our lifestyles must change in many ways as ecosystems cannot change in many ways. We believe the cause of this monster pollution problem has been to a significant extent attitudinal, born of recklessness, greed, poverty, desperation, laziness, ignorance and/or a penchant for cheating. It often involves the attitudes and beliefs of those who are serial polluters and what they think they have the right to do at everyone else's expense and sacrifice of well being. We are emphatically telling those chronic offenders here in so many words that the days of rolling down your window as you drive along the highway and throwing the wrapper outside, those days were actually over long ago so why don't you seem to know it yet?
See the bottom of Know Your Client page for our other commentaries.
Pan Geo Investment Investigation - 83 Dirty Energy Countries
Here we present the latest iteration of our investigation entitled The 83 Dirty Energy Countries (first published December 9, 2007).
The rule of law is paramount among men and women. It has been hailed as the codification that, properly attended to, can solve any problem humanity can thrust on us. Most people believe it takes mere days, weeks or, at worst, years to reach agreement, a treaty or new laws concerning even the most horrible kinds of things like, for example, war. Whatever the situation is, given enough political brainpower, charisma and will, the most grievous crisis will be solved before too long by the powers that be. Hear, hear, the ayes have it.
But look, ...out on the horizon, what is that sickly-pink mass lighting up the silvery-brown haze? Enter nature's law. The advisors for nature are sorry to report that nature's law operates on nature's time scale. That's right, on the geologic time scale not according to a leader's calendar. Remember those secondary school science courses? Now we are not talking about some obstinate leader "x" in some area of the world "y" who will not cooperate with "z". We are talking about temperature, pressure, oxygen, H2O, acidity, bacteria, viruses, disease, weather, in short about physical phenomena that affect everyone. There is nowhere to hide from nature, no way to fool nature and unlikely to be a second chance to deal with nature if we botch it up the first go-around. We may not be around by the time the Earth recuperates over geologic time.
Allow us to wearing our geophysical hat now. We believe the 0.7 degree Celsius rise in temperature that has already taken place relative to pre-industrial times is too much. Contemplating up to a 2 degree Celsius rise is quite nutty. Yet existing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases are said to pretty well ensure us of another 0.7 degree Celsius increase in global average temperature over time. That makes it a 1.4 degrees Celsius rise that we have bagged. Lake Baikal in Siberia contains nearly one-fifth of the world's fresh water. It has warmed by 1.2 degrees Celsius in just over 60 years. But we are still not done - we are now told we have the fate of about a 50:50 chance of a cumulative 2 degree Celsius rise even if we cut back emissions by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050. And, as we know, we have no treaty anywhere that countries generally will agree to anything like a cutback of that magnitude. In fact, all we ever seem to hear about in the news is further increases of pollutants emanating from virtually every jurisdiction on Earth. Carbon-dioxide emissions have risen by about 3% each year since the new millennium. We're now at about 387 parts per million (ppm) of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere. This is an appalling number considering that until the Industrial Revolution started in the 1800's the concentration in the air of one greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, was generally below 25 ppm. We oppose the ceiling for carbon dioxide of 455 ppm cited by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as being too lax.
And we are still not through facing up to the full magnitude of potential or likely temperature increases. Some scientists have even cited a possible 6 centigrade degree rise by about 2050 if the capacity of oceans, flora and the atmosphere to absorb and utilize carbon dioxide diminishes over time. Alarmingly, that magnitude of temperature increase has already occurred on average in the Antarctic Peninsula during winter there.
It is now known that as the temperature of marine water increases, its capacity to absorb carbon dioxide diminishes. There are already results from EU-sponsored research on the North Atlantic showing that in as little as 13 years, the earth's ability to utilize atmospheric carbon dioxide in that area has been reduced by one-eighth overall due to reduced capacity of this ocean water to uptake CO2 by a factor of about one half. Additionally, as nitrogen and nitrate concentrations increase there is less ability of organisms and the physical environment to utilize it. This may lead to more algal blooms and marine dead zones.
Over and above the phenomena of reduced capacity, we have a selection of what may be called "wild cards", so-called because the effects associated with these phenomena are apt to be potentially very significant and can occur rather abruptly. However, there is currently large uncertainty associated with forecasts of the processes involved. One such wild card is large-scale deep melting of northern frozen soil permafrost areas. Such an event or progression would result in possibly-gargantuan release of methane greenhouse gas into the atmosphere where it would then be available to trap heat and contribute to further incremental global temperature increases. Further, we also have a kind of background level of methane gas from decayed organic matter that comes into the air due to soil degradation generally. Release of more greenhouse gases on a lagged basis, perhaps up to a decade, occurs from many soil types in the vicinity of prior deforested areas. Another freaky wildcard scenario is if large quantities of soot that have accumulated in the upper atmosphere, mostly from burning fossil fuels, were to clear or be cleaned away somehow. If that transpired, scientists say, based on presently-observed concentrations of black carbon there, thermometers could rise by about another 0.9 degrees Celsius. The effect on temperature of the long term recovery of the ozone hole above Antarctica is quite uncertain presently but very well could augment warming. On the other hand, aerosols that have accumulated above the Arctic are believed to contribute to the current temperature increase there (so if that airborne particle pollution were to be removed or reduced in some way, it is suspected there would be a slight cooling effect as a result).
Now let's add up these global average temperature rise increments again to take stock of the situation. Even if it is done grossly on the back of an envelope using basic probability concepts. Finished? Do you think that number is now enough of a warning to give us all pause? Actually, well, er', no. As it appears to us, as of even date, there is still widespread pooh-poohing and downplaying of the significance of global warming and climate change. We have finger-pointing but limited concessions and not much in the way of concrete actions internationally on how exactly we are going to slay this pollution monster, and to slay the dragon expeditiously before it breathes fire on us. We agree the dictates, time-lines, complexities and imperatives in achieving a low-carbon global economy will require an impartial, multilateral, "war room" institution of some kind. From Ho Chi Minh City to Ouagadougou to Thiruvananthapuram, the world is standing by looking out for solutions. The influence of politics should be minimized to avoid deadlock and overly-partisan non-cooperation. We further do not believe the vast majority of people in many countries yet understand, or how it could be, that we are all in the "slow bake" of global warming. As more and more people come to realize it and what it means for their own lives and future generations, we think they will become increasingly upset with their political representatives of all persuasions which is not good. That's just another reason to depoliticize the entire issue and promote effective, independent, measured responses to the myriad significant ramifications of climate change that seem to be popping up on a daily basis.
Pollution is a global multi-headed hydra that must be contained and slain by us all. Given the gravity of the situation, no country should be sitting back waiting on others to do something, even if jurisdiction is uncertain: On the high seas, we have reprehensible burning of heavy marine "bunker" fuel oil by ships which by virtue of how "cheap" and dirty it is now constitutes about 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. One report blamed the soot, fine particulate matter, sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide from dirty diesel-burning ships as being directly linked to about 60,000 deaths annually from respiratory diseases, cancer and heart problems.
To illustrate the opportunity costs involved, consider the bad case scenario that this century a maximum of about 500 billion tonnes of carbon emissions can enter the atmosphere globally to keep the Earth's temperature from rising more than 2 to 2.5 degrees Celsius. Given such a limitation, the burning of any and all coal, coal-to-liquids, coal-to-gas, coal-to-liquids, heavy oil, shale oil, fossil diesel, oily-gasoline, rubber tires and bunker fuel is setting us back because we are reaching the limit of all fossil fuel burning much faster by not eliminating the dirtiest, low end energy sources. Shut it down. Tax it, hit the source of it. Force this lampblack junk out of the marketplace or phase it out by having producers, processors and consumers of dirty power pay heavy levies for the environmental calamity they are contributing to. One of many consequences of not doing so is to further constrain the use of cleaner energy sources in future such as natural gas.
So far, we have come to the sorry conclusion that most resistance to change here arises from vested interests in dirty energy sources and other major polluters. The only way the momentum to cause these environmental externalities can persist for capital intensive, polluting industries is if there are a significant number of sizeable financial institutions profiting from backing them. Those financiers may help the company lobby government for grants, tax breaks, subsidies, exemptions, research and development help, special treatment, etc. so the industrial player does not have to pay for the full pollution audit trail associated with their activities. Instead, inevitably, others will. These corporations do not want to stop their pursuits because they do not want to get burned on their investments, retirement income or by hefty write-downs and write-offs of capital stock. There is no way out for them except to realize their losses which they refuse to accept doing so the entire ordeal is extended for a while longer. Until, of course, things get even worse environmentally than the current outlook.
Studies have recently been published questioning the value of commissioning any new coal-fired power plant or of exploring for any more oil and gas. Why? The basic rationale was the Earth is already severely taxed by fossil fuel burning so we will not be able to utilize existing coal capacity or reserves of oil and gas before we have to stop using those energy sources altogether. Or risk triggering dangerous climate change and the attendant likely consequences of that warming, namely, widespread social unrest, calamity from spread of disease vectors and mass migration attempts by people from various hotspots. One early example of this may be the en masse migration of Mongolian nomadic herders into cities as a result of weather-induced disruption attributable to climate change. Similarly, reindeer herders near the Arctic have been devastated in recent times by the effects of warming that has already taken place in the north. This is happening to them currently even though they have been herding for their livelihood since about 1400 without any weather-related impacts to knock them out of herding permanently. Another example could be intense water conflicts arising in Peru and Chile that have prompted miners to resort to pumping ocean water hundreds of kilometers into the Andes mountain ranges where their mineral and metal extraction and refining operations take place. All this work and infrastructure is required to avoid drawing any more water from watershed areas, a practice that had led to clashes with the local people who also depend on the groundwater, lakes and rivers. Drought has affected 120,000 people already in Chile in 2008. Its their worst drought in 50 years.
Unabated pollution and continuing deforestation, resulting in warming temperatures from rising greenhouse gas emissions, are already known to be have been primarily responsible for large-scale physical phenomena. This includes rearranging ocean currents; fracturing massive blocks of polar ice; affecting rainfall patterns leading to droughts and flooding; melting glaciers, perennial ice floes and ice sheets; triggering, with increased frequency, heat waves, thunderstorms, hurricanes, cyclones, typhoons and more. Its also quite clear now that the ongoing northward and southward expansion of the upper atmospheric jet streams is driven by some mass scale phenomena such as global increase in temperature and/or ozone depletion or holes at the poles of the Earth. An extreme weather event and the associated calamity on average now occurs somewhere on Earth at least once a day, double the rate of just a few years ago. The Norwegian International Polar Year Secretariat has said that if Norway's average temperature in 2008 is merely as warm as the prior year, that conceivably could be enough to melt the Arctic ice cap this summer. Tropical glaciers on several continents including the Andes in South America and Ruwenzori in Africa may be gone completely in less than a generation. Glacier melting ongoing in Central Asia and, in particular, the Himalayas, will at some point result in disastrous debris falls, mudslides, flooding then follow-on drought and consequently, reduced crop yields. Sounds to us like a recipe for epic chaos and misery given the staggering number of people in Indochina alone who could be victimized by such phenomena. If you like rolls of the dice, its now said there is already a 50% chance, that is, half a certainty that the Greenland ice sheet will melt, an event that over many decades would result in a worldwide sea level rise of about 7 meters.
We do not understand what is happening here. The aforementioned is some of what we realize and are seeing today. Imagine how are children feel about what phenomenon might become real next. For example, we hope the recently-documented proliferation of the 4-brained, 24 eye, lethally-poisonous box jellyfish is not another sorry impact of global warming. And we have no knowledge yet that there is a link but the fact they are reproducing markedly in number has us on the lookout for answers here too. Already we know Namibian authorities are concerned about jellyfish multiplying offshore near them and exacting a toll on their marine fishery. Warmer water can absorb less oxygen. Could it be that global warming induced hypoxic (low oxygen) events in marine waters near Namibia are triggering either directly or indirectly the helter-skelter survival instinct reproduction of jellyfish as those fish or the sea life they eat are threatened by oxygen deficiency and increasing acidity of the water? We have similar concerns about the ravenous jumbo squid. We already know the giant Pacific Oyster invasion that threatens species such as mussels and Eider ducks is caused by global warming of marine waters.
We have many current, troubling pollution and deforestation related questions about stewardship of the Earth's environment and ecosystems including: First and foremost, the Earth, being multinational, probably is wondering if in our world of competing national interests, something is being missed by the custodians? Are we trying to test at what point the atmosphere, waterways, or flora and fauna including homo sapiens, cease up? Or if we are underway with the 6th mass extinction of species, the 5th being when dinosaurs were wiped out? Or how much mercury in the air and methyl mercury in the water coal-burners can contribute without impacting our food chain, water supply and health? Or at what point a few new chemical reactions will start that we may know little about? Or do we want to experiment with the rate of mountain glacier melting to determine the capacity of alpine lakes before they burst? Or to gauge at what point major ice fracturing and melting of an ice shelf could occur in polar regions? Or do we want to tempt the recent partial ice shelf collapse in the Antarctic Peninsula to see if it will go all the way? Or do we want to experiment with how little sea ice can remain and still be able to call it home for walruses, narwhals and seals? Or do we want to know at what temperature vast stores of methane could be released from frozen soil permafrost regions of northern countries? Or do we want to test the hypothesis that North Atlantic deep water now circulates into the Arctic Ocean? Or do we want to find out what the implications of our ongoing carbon build-up and consequential deep-ocean warming are for global air temperature (even if further carbon emissions are stopped completely some day)? Or to find out how much carbonic acid marine waters can contain before dinoflagellates (plankton) take over from diatoms? Or are we testing how warm acid in a tidal pool will affect snails and sea urchins or their larvae? Or to examine what concentration of hydrogen ions in seawater rises to before coral shells begin dissolving rather than building? Or to verify if fish stocks can replenish despite warming, altered currents and circulation, increased acidity, various pollutants in the water and movement of alien species to new locations? Or to see if shell-crushing predators like sharks, jellyfish and crabs enter warming polar waters to create havoc there for existing benthic marine life? Or to verify if its already in the cards that most coral reefs will be obliterated some time before 2100? Or to see how expansive the ocean's biological deserts can be? Or to test to what extent we have dead zones in shallower marine waters especially near the mouths of rivers? Or to find out how the formation and dispersion of different types of clouds are affected by global warming especially if they are the heat-trapping variety, namely, probably those occurring at higher levels in the atmosphere? Or to find out to what extent rainfall is curtailed as a result of having many more tiny pollution aerosol particles in the atmosphere for moisture to coalesce around? Or do we really want to realize at what point the air begins leaking into outer space? Or how much sub-micrometer sized particles from vehicle exhaust we can tolerate without developing heart, lung or liver disease? Or to determine what level of persistent organic pollutants can be accumulated in our blood before diabetes is triggered? Or how salty the near shore environment can become before pregnant women develop childbearing issues? Or at what point species "x" mutates into species "(x+p)" in the field? Or at what point birth defect "y" begins to ramp up? Or at what point virus "z" gains a foothold or flavivirus "f" expands its territory? Or to test how the incidence and geographic spread of malaria, dengue fever, chikungunya, encephalitis, meningococcal meningitis, West Nile virus, Chandipura virus or Ross River virus varies as a function of rising temperature and humidity? Or to examine how global warming contributes to the geographic spread of diseases such as those we just rattled off? Or to find out if we will augment the number of endangered or extinct species of amphibians, including many frogs and other natural enemies of mosquitoes carrying the aforementioned diseases, beyond the 100 or so amphibians that have already disappeared over the past quarter century? Up to 50% of all known amphibian species are currently considered to be threatened with extinction, the most sudden wave of extinction ever known to mankind. You may also add tropical insects to that list as these cold-blooded creatures are as likely to roast as a result of global warming than quickly adapt. Or do we want to find out how much ozone and other air pollution is required before pollinators such as bees cannot sense the aroma of flowers beyond "q" meters away when it used to be "r" meters ? Already now r = 5q approximately in many car-culture metropolises whereas r = q historically. Or do we really want to see how protein levels in staple food crops decrease as atmospheric carbon dioxide increases? Or to see how many countries dependent on rain for farming will have crop yields cut in half within a decade? Or to determine how many methane out-gassing livestock we can coexist with? Or to see how well a Maldivian, Kiribatian or Bangladeshi can swim? Or to check how far polar bears can swim underwater or to see if they really enjoy mating with grizzly bears as they are pressured to go further south to survive? Or to see if king penguins can still make it despite the rise in temperature? Or to find out how short hibernation can be for chipmunks, squirrels, marmots and hedgehogs without driving them to fatigue, mixed up behavior, an early demise or possible extinction? Or do we want to test how many wheatears, swallows and chiff-chaffs can be fooled into staying on in the UK for the winter? Or do we want to find out how widespread, concentrated and lethal pesticide can be before the number of songbirds that remain can no longer be heard? Ad infinitum. We don't get it.
Its counterproductive to attempt to rationalize the situation by arguing we need to free people from poverty or to promote economic growth and the only way to achieve it is to continue to line the pockets of businessmen and officials benefitting from violating the environment. In a new age market economy, if that entity could not pay for the full cost of running that operation including the externalities, that organization should be shut down and resources should automatically be reallocated to other competitors. Very likely other competitors includes new competitors who have worked hard and risked a lot to develop higher-quality, more advanced alternatives. Alternatives that very possibly are being offered for sale at apparently-higher prices than the artificially-low price of the inferior good being supplanted. So our general advice is for regulators and government officials to get out of the way of progress; don't try to team up with an old line competitor to push an inferior good or service on the consumer a while longer. We further disagree with providing non-public guidance to coal miners or coal-fired utilities on their investments who seek to lobby for help or clarification about the rules for carbon markets or whatever. If they invested in coal, that's their risk capital and their problem from lack of understanding or due diligence not anyone else'es.
We believe that operating a carbon cap and trading system, however well-intentioned, at this juncture is too risky. Already the social pressure scramble from various industrial polluters is on with regulators for carbon trading exemptions. It may invite attempts to spend taxpayers money inefficiently; result in buying pressure saturation of the market from those parties who do not want to reduce their pollution absolutely; compensate those who should not be compensated; improperly incentivize; cause society to settle for token payments from transgressors; prolong what should be forestalled; circumvent what should be faced squarely and resolutely; encourage participants to manipulate, wrangle, placate, appease, obfuscate about objectives and/or shirk responsibility; result in the sly shifting of assets, production and, of course, emissions geographically; precipitate delays, posturing and diddling around rather than solving the many, serious pollution problems we are faced with (irrespective of whether those pollution problems are associated with, or can now be linked to, climate change or not). To us, its too much like a hunter with a lance around a campfire in Krakatoa, East of Java, who decides to joust with a spewing volcano. At this point, we have to have 100% certainty-equivalent that whatever world leaders come up with to stop polluters and climate change, that it works and can be seen to be working. Most emphatically, let's ensure the prescription does not give the appearance that something is being done when it is ineffective in halting climate change for whatever reason. No whistling in the dark coal smoke.
To achieve efficient and effective allocation of resources, you have to ensure the mechanism is applied to the root cause of the problem and is cheat-proof and transparent in its application. Therefore, we think there should be a Global Externality Tax (GET). It would be something like a Value-Added Tax, however, the levy would be against the guilty producer or perpetrator. If they choose to continue to operate in an activity that has externalities associated with it, in particular, pollution, then they pay the incremental tax associated with that incremental production and environmental externality or cease activity. If the source country does not cooperate in assessing and collecting the tax, then the destination country would do it for them. A carbon tax or tariff could be a subset of GET. GET extends the power to any country or union shipping or receiving goods and services to precisely target and in effect potentially drive dysfunctional economic actors out of business. The producer of incremental pollution pays the consequences of that incremental externality. This isn't protectionism as in protecting some narrow self-interested party from a foreign competitor. Rather, its full cost accounting that's designed to protect us all from those with narrow self interest, those that want to take more money for themselves whilst leaving their environmental bill for others to pay, to pay perhaps with their own lives.
We are concerned that carbon trading mechanisms alone are wholly inadequate in addressing the problem. Could such a market actually usurp or distort capital markets efficient allocation of resources given that a GET is fully implemented? We wonder about that. With GET you know there will be no free ride for those who continue to pollute because the costs of the tax are assessed directly against the offender and they can sink or try to swim a little further with it. If the world sees that pollution / emissions are still out of control by so much, governments can just ratchet up the percentage rate of the GET applied. Like a laser-guided missile, its a direct hit and there is no doubt about the outcome or the consequences. User pays, the abuser pays. There are no delays, no opportunity for intervention, circumvention or gamesmenship. At this juncture, why should it be otherwise?
In our view, potential solutions to stop the very serious and complicated problems of climate change should not be entangled with too many other problems, for example poverty. Those issues have to be solved separately, over and above mechanisms put in place globally by governments to halt greenhouse gas emissions buildup, water pollution, rise in temperature, threats to the survival of particular species, etc. If objectives are melded, there cannot be any further delays to a negotiating process that's already bogged down and too slow.
Time is tight. A way to progress even faster would be to plan and push for a worldwide ban on coal including lignite and bituminous coal and coal-based synfuels such as methane. The lone exception for more time for replacement may be for anthracite, hard coking coal to support the steel industry and other metallurgy. Otherwise, coal's time has come and gone. Speaking purely in economic not scientific terms, banning it means that, considering the cost of externalities, coal is already much more expensive than other forms of energy not cheaper, GET it?
Clearly, the magnitude of economic growth as reflected in Pan Geo Investment Global Table™ (see Performance Page) does correlate to some extent with countries that end up in Pan Geo Investment Eco Table™ below but correlation does not imply causation. We think there is strong evidence that new methods, energy sources, technologies, people and organizations associated with clean and green growth can and will systematically go about solving the world's pollution problems. The key is to accelerate this changeover to be as quick as possible. This implies the need to clear reactionary forces out of the way with fervor or to bring them onside.
Meanwhile, in the aftermath of Bali, we feel we have no choice but to hand off to the authorities scary black, not- quite-as-scary grey and murky brown boxes with ghoulish pink ribbons containing metallic grey memoranda cards illustrated below. Black boxes symbolize chemical-pink altered sunlight piercing through carbon black soot in the atmosphere.
| PAN GEO INVESTMENT ECO TABLE™ - The 83 Dirty Energy Countries© as of May 11, 2008 First published December 9, 2007. All rights reserved. | |
|---|---|
| Memoranda | |
| China, India | Both countries have populations that will soon be in the 1.5 to 2 billion range, numbers that are far beyond their ecological carrying capacity of perhaps 500 million people each. Black carbon "soot" in the upper atmosphere above these two countries is estimated to block almost 10% of sunlight that would otherwise reach the earth's surface in China and there is about a 7% dimming above India. China and India together account for about one-third of the world's soot emissions, a form of black carbon. Much of this soot emanates from coal, diesel fuel, wood and dung burning. Pollution aerosols and smoke from China comprise an estimated 13% of overall emissions currently in the air in North America, arriving by way of the East Asian airstream. In China, there are now alarming levels of greenhouse gases, sulfur dioxides and particulates caused by rampant coal-fired electricity generation and hoards of dirty diesel fuel powered trucks. By 2010, the previous decade is expected to have resulted in an addition of at least 600 million tonnes of carbon emissions. Coal still powers about three-quarters of China's supply of electricity. Rapid urbanization, industrialization and numerous exhaust-gushing vehicles add to the woes. Breathing the air in Beijing is said to be like smoking 2 packs of cigarettes a day. Its definitely not only Beijing; many of the world's most polluted cities have been reported to be in China. Fine particulate matter and black sooty gunk containing carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and ozone impinges and/or sticks to everything in China's cities including the tiny air sacs in people's lungs. Environmentally-induced illness is already widespread affecting nearly one million people a year. Most water is not drinkable and up to one third of the water supply is too foul to be used even for agricultural or light industrial purposes. Already, many millions of Chinese people encounter drinking water shortages every year, as do livestock. The numbers are apt to swell as Himalayan glaciers continue to melt as a result of global warming thus, in the medium term, threatening water levels in great river basins such as the Yangtze and Yellow River watersheds. Some informed sources are now saying two-thirds of China's glaciers, including from Tibetan Plateau alpine areas, will be gone by mid-century. Upwards of half a billion people depend on the Yellow River in some way yet it remains seriously polluted and water levels have already been in decline. Moreover, two-thirds or more of all waterways and groundwater are polluted. The Bohai Sea, a dump for prodigious amounts of untreated wastewater, chemicals and fertilizer is close to being devoid of all life forms. Many, if not most, maritime ecosystems are considered to be unsalvageable. Organophosphate and organo-phosphorous pesticide residues still show up in the food supply even though use of those pesticides is illegal. This ecological horror flick is still filming but we believe the Chinese government has been making many moves recently to seriously address environmental problems. In India, their agriculture-driven economy has major issues due to raw sewage and chemicals percolating or being flushed directly into bodies of water or as leachate. Pesticides banned in many other countries are frequently still used in India. As well, there is serious deforestation, soil erosion, overgrazing and other maladies associated with huge numbers of people that try to eek out a living or subsistence from working the land. The Indus, Brahmaputra and Ganges Rivers all depend on Himalayan glaciers to replenish fresh water. If that does not happen, food shortages may result from reduced crop yields. If too much glacial melting occurs or global sea level rises more than about 2 meters, people living in low-lying coastal cities, for example, Kolkata, are in big trouble. Kolkata also has dreadful air quality with many old vehicles plying the streets. Many locations near the Ganges River have high concentrations of arsenic in the groundwater which ultimately manifests itself as cancer in some residents. Ganges and Yamuna are further polluted from discharge of untreated sewage, garbage and effluent directly into the rivers. Near and through Dehli, the Yamuna is deathly dark and rank in smell. In various localities there are alarming levels of fecal coliforms from organic waste in waterways such that people should not be going in the water or be in contact with its spray. Needless to say, water is generally not potable directly in India. More and more children are developing chronic bronchial asthma from breathing the air, especially in the big cities where garbage and raw sewage disposal also tends to be problematic. There is lots of carbon dioxide, sulfur and nitrous oxide emitted by heavy duty diesel fuel burners and carbon monoxide from 2-wheelers. We also have high concentrations of ozone at street level. Both vehicular exhaust and high levels of hydrogen sulfide emissions from industrial sources have been blamed for respiratory ailments and illnesses. India and China are both rapidly developing an automobile culture with relatively lax or weakly-enforced air quality standards. Ground-level ozone pollution is so concentrated from burning fossil fuels that both countries already have reduced crop yields in many areas as a consequence. Governments are starting to crack down in an attempt to roll back pollution especially from atrocious diesel vehicles. Still, vehicular emissions are expected to escalate perhaps dramatically. Many noxious-combustion large ships add significantly to the burden as does air traffic. Further, both of these countries are already heavily hooked on coal yet are apparently gearing up for dramatic expansion of their coal extraction and coal-fired power industries. We hope they do not tempt doomsday scenarios by continuing to start yet another coal plant operating every few days. Coal investing has been rising at 50% or more annually for several years now in China and China accounts for about one quarter of worldwide coal use. Recently, however, China has begun moving to stop some of the dirtiest coal enterprises from operating. We are somewhat hopeful China will achieve their goal of becoming an "ecological civilization". This is partly because we think they will be among the first nations to both toughen their existing environmental laws markedly and send in police to enforce the provisions if necessary. This will help ensure their naturally-lovely country is not being violated further by defiant, reckless, carefree polluters who routinely break, circumvent or otherwise ignore environmental laws, rules and regulations. Further China was first to recognize and pan cropland-based biofuels; one of the first to ban logging widely and begin massive afforestation; one of the first to recognize the potential value of implementing quantitative taxes, tariffs, fees, fines, levies or whatever you want to call it to penalize polluters directly to force them into compliance and to clean up their act and soon or face being shut down. Many polluters and inefficient operators were shut down. China was also first at population control, something this planet needs in our view. That is a lot of important firsts for China. |
| Indonesia, Brazil, Vietnam | These are all fast-growing, densely-populated countries that historically have been and mostly still are subject to over-logging, slash-and-burn agricultural land-clearing and sometimes huge smoky peat and forest fires. Especially around Indonesia, the third-biggest greenhouse gas emitter, this results in enormous hazy areas having reduced penetration of sunlight. Vietnam has seen a net gain in trees lately due to monolithic plantation-style reforestation projects but restoring biodiversity may be a long and arduous process. Brazil and Indonesia have more threatened species than virtually anywhere else on Earth. Deforestation and loss of habitat in tropical rainforests is an ongoing big concern not only because of endangered species but also due to the consequent reduced global capacity for uptake of carbon dioxide by plant life. In Sumatra, deforestation for agricultural and industrial development has led to countless majestic animals such as elephants, tigers and orangutans either disappearing, being on the run or holed-up in orphanages. In Brazil, more than 20% of the Amazon is gone and some fear upwards of 50% may disappear by about 2030 along with many species of plants and animals, not to mention possible medicines of the future. Special federal police and environmental agents have been sent in to try to stop illegal logging, land-clearing, sawmill operations and lighting of forest fires from escalating anew across this frontier. They are now also going after farmers and ranchers that cut down trees when they should not be. Coal use was once widespread but has been in decline due to the rise of sugar-based ethanol sources. In Indonesia, rampant deforestation has also now encroached into their critical carbonaceous peat land areas. Both deforestation and decaying organic matter in the peat lands result in huge releases of greenhouse gases. However, the emissions story is still incomplete because Indonesia is planning to add capacity of tens of thousands of megawatts of coal-fired plants over the next several years such that coal burning will about double by 2011. This will boost their overall pollution totals much higher. Four of every five rivers in Indonesia are said to be in their governments highest category currently, meaning 80% of rivers are severely polluted. If they survive man-made disaster scenes in Indonesia they still have the ever-present possibility of earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, volcanoes and other natural catastrophes to contend with as a consequence of living in close proximity to the Pacific Rim of Fire. Jakarta is slowly subsiding. Increased urbanization and auto-mobility coupled with low income per capita are also big negatives especially for Vietnam and Indonesia. Both those countries export large volumes of coal, in particular, to China. The Mekong, Dong Nai, Saigon and several other rivers in Vietnam are in places severely polluted mostly from industrial and agricultural sources. A 70 km length of the Day River cannot support any life. Only about 10% of Mekong delta factories treat waste water before discharging it into the Mekong River. Use of toxic, illegal pesticides abounds. One of the Dong Nai's streams is virtually dead in sections up to many kilometers long. Industrial zones may not have water treatment plants and so may be a significant source of pollutants. The Saigon River also has acute water pollution from microbes, manganese, oil, ammonia, iron, lead, etc. Hundreds of waterways in and around Ho Chi Minh City are used as dumping areas for industrial effluents and residential garbage. Some canals are ecological disaster scenes. Hanoi's air quality is ghastly. Industrial coal-burning activities and countless inefficient vehicles including huge numbers of old soot and dust spewing motorbikes are significant contributors to pollution here. Some areas still have bad soil contamination from the highly-toxic defoliant dioxin that has not yet been cleaned up. Bronchial asthma, diarrhea, petechial fever, poisoning, fetus malformation and infectious and neurological diseases generally have all been increasing, and a government report blames environmental pollution as the major culprit. The government is funding a plan to try to clean up rivers in Vietnam. As well, Vietnam now has environmental police so we hope various improvements are in the offing. Vietnam has also been smarting due to a decade-long drought in the north. Hopefully, the drought is not caused by global warming which would heighten the likelihood of a persistent problem. Vietnam is not alone wondering; of late, we have had prolonged drought in Australia, Ukraine, Russia, Chile, parts of Africa, SW USA and more. |
| Australia, Canada, Venezuela | These countries are relatively-sparsely populated but have sizeable resource-based economies that are generators of enormous quantities of pollutants. On a per capita basis, Canada and Australia both rank among the world's worst offenders. Coincidentally, both countries have vehement fossil fuel lobbyists with ready access to politicians and little awareness yet how near the end is for their skill sets, vision, investments, financing and/or political donations. Probably all that's really needed now is a few lawsuits and judgments to increase their capacity to recognize change, especially the kind that increasingly is cutting the dirty parts of their industry out of the picture. High levels of vehicular emissions and industrial pollutants are especially noticeable in larger, congested metropolitan areas. Rush hours stink! These countries can also be accused of exporting vast volumes of coal, heavy oil and other fossil fuels to places like China and United States. Australia still relies heavily on coal for 83% of electricity generation. Sydney Harbor is said to have seaweed with the highest levels of lead and copper contamination ever measured. The Murray River has reached perilous levels of pollution with acidity comparable in stretches to sulfuric acid. Rising salinity and acidity is affecting fish and degrading vegetation near the river where the high acid-sulfate content of soil is causing dead zones to form as it oxidizes into sulphuric acid, then runs off. Aluminum, cadmium, nickel and iron have been found to be far beyond safe levels where the river runs into the ocean. Most native river red gum trees, some that are 500 years old, are dying off or have capitulated already due mainly to reduced fresh water volume. Australia has accounted for almost half the world's mammal extinctions over the past 200 years. Three-quarters of the number of shorebirds that existed a generation ago have disappeared. Australia is now among the top five countries in total number of threatened species and biodiversity has dropped. Endangered species range from certain frogs and possums to marine turtles to tree kangaroos to hare wallabies and koala bears. Its apparent that many species cannot now, in 2008, cope with the effects of increases in global temperature, never mind 2020 or 2050. Despite the environmental calamity which also includes 5 years of climate-induced drought resulting in 60% reduction in grain harvests, Australia plans to 2020 have it continuing to be one of the world's largest polluters per person. Canada has less problems from coal mining and burning than Australia but huge externalities from oil sands development in northern Alberta. Canada's greenhouse gas emissions have increased by one-quarter since 1990 which is quite different than reducing same by 6% before 2012 which was the obligation under Kyoto. Alberta alone accounts for more than one third of total absolute emissions in all of Canada. Fresh water has significant inelastic demand value these days but I guess its considered to be another freebee for tar sands investors. After more than a generation, only one mined area has been finally-reclaimed but in a state quite different than the original setting. Who is going to pay for environmental liabilities and when does it start? Fish caught in the Athabasca River have suffered mutations and deformation from the dirty water. Apparently, the Athabasca Chipewayn and Mikisew Cree aboriginals living nearby are being afflicted with a rare cancer, the incidence for which may be attributable to pollution generated at the tar sands. We'd also like to know what percentage of young children use nebulizers to help them breathe in Ft. McMurray, Alberta. Why has it come to this? Tar sands operators collectively are emitting about three times as much greenhouse gases as conventional crude oil production plus generating gigantic seeping moonscape-like "holding" ponds of toxic, sulfur-laden tailings as an offshoot of mining activity. Untold numbers of migratory and local birds including mallard ducks and loons have died after landing in these hydrocarbon-fouled "waters". Moreover, tar sands operators are also using prodigious amounts of fresh water resources as if they have no value, up to about 5 barrels of fresh water for every barrel of heavy oil that ultimately results. Airborne sulfur from north-central Alberta sources mostly ends up in the neighboring province of Saskatchewan where acid rain has become a significant problem. At what point does the needle in the gauge bend towards unsustainable development? What's more, net energy from this source after construction, strip-mining, processing, upgrading, piping, refining and transporting is not so good. Just cooking gummy, goopy tar sands in the initial extraction procedure consumes the energy equivalent of about one third of every barrel produced. With climate-can't-change looming on the horizon as an imperative in virtually every country, it may not be long before there are no refineries left that can upgrade grimy, sulfurous heavy crude because the jurisdiction where they operate has effectively or actually shut them down. We also think many people in western United States would rather have the fresh, clean water forgone from the watershed in the processing of bitumen than the dirty oil. The coldest days of winters in Canada are reported by the British Meteorological Office to already be up to 4 degrees Celsius warmer than just 50 years ago. Little wonder Canadians cannot seem to kill off the pine beetle infestation which has wiped out about half of BC's trees and is still on the march. One entire class of common birds, the aerial insectivores are in dramatic decline in Canada. What's happening to the whip-poor-wills among others? Biologists apparently have not yet pinpointed exactly why this loss is occurring but undoubtedly could make some unsurprising inspired guesses. Venezuela now gives us a glimpse of what the end game might look like for countries that remain heavily focused on fossil fuels and minerals especially heavy oil and coal. We, of course, do not like what we see there either. |
| USA, Germany, Italy | USA has been the biggest greenhouse gas emitter for many years and has only recently been matched by China. Coal-driven plants still provide over 50% of electricity generated and account for about one third of all greenhouse gases each year in USA. Nation wide, they also are responsible for as much as 40% of mercury emissions and 60% of sulfur dioxide emissions. Historically, acid rain has been a big problem in both USA and Germany. That particular phenomenon had been curtailed to a significant extent in recent years but cleaning up abandoned mines remains a big task. Now again however, pollution from oil refineries, including sulfur, is likely to increase markedly in US if heavy crude is used as feedstock unless use of these dirty, sour inputs is cut back or halted, at least in some areas. Given the scale of these two economies and the extent of their trade, pollution is vast from bunker fuel-burning ships entering their waters and diesel trucks rumbling in and out of port areas. The emissions cocktail includes plenty of soot, particulates, nitrogen and sulfur oxides and nitryl chloride. Stricter diesel-powered emissions rules for the future have recently been announced in USA affecting vessels, boats and trains. Ground-level ozone has been problematic particularly in congested areas on hotter days, due to high levels of volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides. In both US and EU there has been a practice of allowing heavy industry such as cement kilns to burn rubber tires as a fuel source which clearly adds to pollution woes. Tire burning releases soot, dioxin and other noxious gases. There are also many fuel inefficient vehicles still on the roads in these jurisdictions and plenty of whimsical driving. Plus we have lots of flights that involve these locations. Jets worldwide add several percentage points to the global tab for greenhouse gases. We think the days of pollution freebies are over so Germany or the EU should not encourage the building of new coal plants by handing out free carbon emissions permits to utilities or anyone else. The US is aiming for 15% of fossil fuel to be replaced by renewable sources by 2022. Germany has developed renewable energy sources for about 15% of its needs already, and are aiming to boost that percentage appreciably which is very commendable and hopeful for the future. However, the main problem we have is that Germany is still far too reliant on dirty brown lignite for power. We trust that American and EU brainpower, smart regulation, research and development, engineering, technology, manufacturing expertise, venture capital and financial wherewithal will play an instrumental role in getting us all out of the environmental mess we are all now in. Answers from anywhere and everywhere on Earth are welcome from San Antonio to Jakarta to Nizhny Novgorod. Italy's bizarre plan to increase its coal reliance to about one-third of the country's needs, more than double what it is now, is obviously going to earn it some serious negativity and scrutiny. This is a marked regression and is all-but-certain to deliver further avoidable pummeling to our mothership, Earth. We hope someone is able to squelch that plan. |
| Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan | Russia is a top-five greenhouse gas emitter, is the largest flarer of gas in the world and burns forests and other biomass extensively. About one quarter of gas associated with oil production is wasted by being flared though plans are in place to cut this to about 5% by 2012. Russia exports plenty of coal and they plan to ramp up domestic use of coal significantly. The coldest days of winters in Russia are reported by the British Meteorological Office to be up to 4 degrees Celsius warmer than during the 1950's, only a half-century ago. In these 3 countries, there is bad air pollution from defense-related activities and heavy industry, coal-fired electric plants and vehicular emissions. Radioactive and otherwise toxic chemical sites and chemical waste are very evident especially in a place such as Dzerzinsk. Norilsk, a northern mining and smelting center, has historically released sulfur dioxide, nickel oxides and various other heavy metal compounds into the air sufficient to knock up to 10 years off your life if you reside there. Large fines and a clamp down on egregious-polluting offenders have only recently been initiated. Kyrgyzstan has already lost more than half its native forests and more than half of its mountain glaciers. Kyrgyzstan has many historic radioactive sites. Nearby rivers and aquifers are contaminated, for example, the Mailuu-Suu River. Further, chemical contamination has inadvertently been redistributed widely into the soil by the wind and overuse of pesticides when farming. Many producers who pollute are government controlled, crown corporations, oligopolists or old, out-of-date companies that had close ties to some government. The need for new laws and regulations to redress pollution, industrial waste and inefficiencies has been recognized by various authorities but change may be slowed, resisted or impeded by bureaucracies and cronies associated with old Soviet-style entities until such time as new technologies, concepts and competitors spur adjustments. Of course, there is a learning curve for the population to adopt new attitudes concerning the need for energy efficiency and conservation. |
| Egypt, Bangladesh | Many people from these two countries live on or near huge deltas, that is, very close to or at sea level. Therefore, flooding of vast low-lying areas may occur at virtually any time, submerging vast food crop areas in the process. One-sixth or so of the land area of Egypt, including Alexandria, is said to be at high risk of being submerged due to a sea level rise of no more than about one meter. Very little of Egypt's land is arable and most of that is near the Nile. In 2007, despite having in place an elaborate safety system including sirens and refuge towers, Bangladesh suffered a major cyclone that resulted in huge loss of life, chaos and the displacement of tens of millions of people. If you live on or near the Sundarbans, the world's largest delta that traverses Bangladesh and southeast India, you are already a victim of climate change. In Egypt, one third of the population live on the Nile River delta and every major city is by or close to the Nile. Given how adverse weather and a rise in sea level has already impacted Bangladesh, Egyptians must also be especially anxious about how climate change may eventually cause, or contribute to, a series of calamities or catastrophe. These two nations illustrate how poverty, overpopulation pressure, desertification, increased salinity and natural hazards combine to overwhelm fragile ecosystems. The abject poor cannot lose anything else or catastrophe will strike. The ongoing encroachment of sea level, increased likelihood of flash flooding of mega-delta areas and further salinisation of water will inevitably affect their food supply. Water-based diseases and contamination abound. Chemicals dumped into rivers in Bangladesh include DDT, other pesticides, oil, chlorine, mercury, ammonia and copious amounts of chemical fertilizers from agricultural run-off. The Buriganga River is said to be close to being devoid of life. Cities such as Dhaka are plugged with old-junk buses and trucks that belch noxious fumes from diesel fuel combustion. The concentration of lead in the air in Dhaka is an order of magnitude greater, that is ten times greater, than the environmental standard set. So we have particulate matter mixed in with carbon monoxide, carbon and nitrogen dioxide, lead and sulfur. Another big contributor to air pollution is the open venting of scads of brick kilns burning wood, coal and even rubber tires. Arsenic contamination of groundwater is a widespread affliction, so widespread that 100 million people are at risk of developing arsenicosis (poisoning from arsenic). Further, particulates have been blamed for kidney and lung diseases including cancer. Surface water contains wastewater and people that drink it are frequently afflicted with a variety of gastro-intestinal illnesses. |
| South Africa, Zimbabwe, Nigeria | The usual suspects are present in these three countries - dense population, ongoing migration attempts from the country to the cities and economies based on fossil fuels, metals and minerals. Pervasive air and water pollution is compounded by inadequate land management, soil erosion, deforestation, desertification, drought and varying degrees of social unrest in different localities. South Africa is currently said to be the biggest-polluting country in Africa. South Africa has a huge mining industry and still relies on coal for almost 90% of its energy needs. For example, there is significant contamination from nitrates in the vicinity of platinum mines. Mine waste is already leaching and leaking from mineral lease areas, contaminating wetlands, waterways and groundwater. Clearly, planning more coal mines within river catchment areas is going to make things worse. Nigeria is especially known for deltaic and offshore oil production. It also has this unconscionable gas flaring yoke to resolve involving the wasteful generation of huge amounts of carbon dioxide and methane. Nigeria also has legions of oily-fuel-driven moped-style motorbikes fouling the air. Their borderline-dry agricultural lands could be tipped into becoming barren unproductive areas as a consequence of the average temperature rise associated with global warming. Deforestation is out of control. Some say there are no forests left in northern Nigeria and an estimated one-third of previously arable land there has become desert. Zimbabwe has serious problems from mining waste, pesticides and raw sewage that ends up in the water such as the Manyame River. Zimbabwe has been trying to encourage widespread cultivation of the jatropha weed shrub as a biofuel and fertilizer since it purportedly does not compete with food crops for arable land and may be inter-planted with other crops and in quite arid areas. |
| Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador | Deforestation is a big problem. Colombia has significant uncontrolled deforestation and land-clearing including that done by drug dregs planting coca shrubs in remote areas including national parks. Mexico has had one of the highest rates of tree loss anywhere; only about one-sixth of their original forests still exist. Mexico is among the top five countries in number of threatened species. 10% of indigenous species are gone forever. Water pollution is widespread from pesticides, sewage and industrial waste, and there are shortages of drinking water. Air pollution degenerates into a suffocating quagmire in densely-populated urban areas of Mexico and Colombia such as Mexico City, Ciudad Juarez and Bogota. In Mexico City, there is an unhealthy level of ozone in the air more frequently than 4 out of every 5 days. Industrial corridors are responsible for strafing local populations with hideous levels of noxious chemicals such as benzene and carbon disulfide. Ecuador has been guilty of having one of the highest deforestation rates in the world. It has also had serious problems with industrial polluters, in particular, those that have caused water pollution as a result of their careless oil and gas production activities in the Amazon. |
| Haiti, Sudan, North Korea | Deforestation is out of control here. In Haiti, upland soil erosion has historically been another devastating consequence of deforestation. Today, only about 3% of forest cover remains. 3%! Also we have problematic air and water pollution especially noticeable in Port au Prince. The Sudan has significant desertification and water shortages from decades of less rainfall supporting more and more people. Food inflation and scarcity has the potential, in the absence of increased outside help, to escalate into, or contribute to, widespread social unrest, conflict and famine in either or all of these countries. Given the racial tensions and atrocities that have taken place in the Sudan, it cannot absorb any more stressors. Deforestation is not as serious in North Korea but they have aged, inefficient, sunset industries and water pollution on the brink of contributing to breakdown in societal functioning in an unstable part of the world. In Sudan and North Korea, leaders need to chill out, give up and reach for whatever help they can get to prevent more of their people from being driven into the ground due to negligence. |
| Poland, Czech Republic | These two have been environmental calamity areas in the past due in large measure to heavy use of coal and toxic metallurgical operations. This led to horrid air pollution, acid rain, water pollution and degradation of the forests. And you may think that maybe that would....and you would be wrong - Poland is still angling for more coal use even though almost all their electricity generation arises from burning coal. Czech Republic is about 60% dependent on coal for electric power. Ostrava, a gritty steelmaking hub, is among the most polluted places in Central Europe. Residents there are protesting what they have to breathe every day. The European Union (EU) has codified and slammed these two countries with new emissions rules in a rearguard action to have them quickly improve their situation or face EU economic and political repercussions. |
| Azerbaijan, Moldova | These two are guilty of intensive use of various agricultural chemicals and fertilizers including toxic defoliants and banned pesticides including DDT. Severe air, water and soil pollution has resulted in this area of the world and it is likely to take a long time for it to rebound ecologically even if a concerted effort begins now. Decades of heavy industry, in particular, oil drilling-related activity, petrochemicals and serving as a hub for cargo shipping have contributed to the current dire state of Baku. Many of its citizens' lives are endangered by pollution. |
| Ukraine, Bosnia and Herzegovina | Look here to see the effects of having significant coal mining and coal-fired power plants. Predictably, the consequences of this are grave aggravated by large-scale metal mining and lingering radiation contamination from events like the Chernobyl nuclear site accident. |
| Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Trinidad and Tobago | Qatar is a small but highly industrialized country that creates emissions at a rate about three times higher than United States on a per capita basis. Qatar has been investigating their heavy industry concerning possibly-serious lead, cadmium and mercury contamination issues and have instigated border checks to verify what exactly is incoming. Kuwait and United Arab Emirates also have high externalities on a per capita basis for their societies to contend with as a result of industrialization, construction, urbanization and use of more and more vehicles. Of course, we are going to love Masdar City and UAE's emphasis on capturing solar energy. Trinidad and Tobago greenhouse gas emissions are also way too high on a per capita basis from sources including oil refining, petrochemicals, cement, construction and of course, shipping, air travel and other modes of transportation. So we would not want to see rubber tire burning on top of all this. |
| Uganda, Zambia, Tanzania, Kenya, Mozambique | Deforestation is rampant in these countries so, especially in Tanzania and Zambia, massive absolute amounts of carbon sinks have been lost not to mention habitat and species. Uganda may soon be running low on timberland altogether due to unchecked encroachment activity. Uganda also needs to treat sewage, reduce water pollution in cities and minimize algae infestation resulting in eutrophication of Lake Victoria. Toxic cyanobacteria has been found in the water which is worrisome. A recent government advisory said almost all water from springs in Kampala was contaminated with human feces. Authorities have also become aware of the practice of reckless dumping of dangerous industrial chemicals and residues into waterways. Zambia and lately also Tanzania have been encountering problems from mining-related effluent such as acid rain and acid mine drainage. Zambia has pockets of extreme soil contamination from cadmium, zinc and especially lead which is present in people's blood way beyond safe levels. Tanzania apparently has legions of small-scale miners trying to extract minerals using mercury at great personal risk. They also have many large mining operations. Mining is a loosely-regulated industry here and there are questions arising about where toxic waste being generated is ending up. Kenya's industrial, agricultural and urban waste problems are acute, too. Pesticides long banned in other countries are still being used in Kenya and have been implicated in the deaths of species from hippopotamuses to vultures. Nairobi is polluted with various discharges that have become especially acute in slum areas of the city. Especially in rural areas, many people have to cover long distances every day to retrieve water, perhaps dirty water. We think the recently developed use of the jatropha plant to produce clean biofuel is a good initiative. In Mozambique, unconstrained deforestation fuels a charcoal subsistence economy. This country is also victimized by the spread of barren, unproductive land. |
| Iran, Pakistan | There has been a large increase in the number of motor vehicles, mostly very inefficient ones, on the roads, especially in the cities such as Tehran, Karachi and Lahore. Inefficient industrial and vehicle combustion results in air containing heavy metal particles, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and unburned hydrocarbons way beyond safety standards not to mention the waste of fuel. Merely to get from a to b, two-stroke, 3 wheel motor rickshaws in places like Karachi eject ghastly plumes of poisonous air as if there were no tomorrow. Agricultural waste runoff, discharges of untreated sewage and industrial effluents are also big causes of pollution. Deforestation, soil erosion and desertification add to their woes. There are also shortages of potable water which may occur chronically across large areas of Pakistan. Pesticides and insecticides banned in many countries are still used in Pakistan. Consequently, there has been growth and spreading of aflatoxins into feed stocks sufficient to cause poultry and even large animals like buffalo to die. Even though most agricultural land in Pakistan depends on the Indus River for water, the volume of water available is likely to diminish due to increased melting of Central Asian mountain glaciers. |
| Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Madagascar | Deforestation, in particular, clearing of critical mangrove forests that not only utilize carbon dioxide and store carbon but also serve to protect coastal areas from erosion, siltation and salt intrusion, is clearly damaging wetlands ecosystems. There is an associated loss of habitat and biodiversity. These countries have dumped too much raw sewage into their waterways. Malaysia has turned more and more to bring on-stream new coal-fired electricity-generating capacity even though they are already well up in the rankings of egregious greenhouse gas emitters (25th or so). Too much land has been cleared to make way for palm oil or rubber plantations. If people generally realized palm oil is bad for their heart, there would be little or no food-related demand for it. That alone would likely kill the expansion of this industry and the associated land-clearing binge regardless of its use for biodiesel, soap, cosmetics, etc. The Philippines, convinced they are pursuing the most cost effective solution, have begun a regression into more and more coal-driven power plants which they permit even in cities. The Meycauayan River is very polluted due to a proliferation of manufacturing activity within easy reach. Illegal small-time miners often dump waste directly into waterways. There has been high levels of mercury affecting the fishery and shellfish. The Pasig River is nearly dead ecologically due mostly to unchecked residential garbage and sewage influx from the greater Manila area. We think 50% Filipino population growth in less than 20 years is ridiculous. We don't mince words about it because we believe the ecological carrying capacity of the Earth presently is around 4.8 billion people, and we have a total population of about 6.7 billion already. Pollution levels per person in Thailand are high compared to many neighboring countries. Chiang Mai air is so fouled with smoke and exhaust it fails to clear so government have resorted to trying to geo-engineer raining in the north of the country to force cleansing of the shroud of pollution. Industrial sources have been discharging toxins into rivers illegally. Recent limited availability of 20% ethanol gasoline blends and 5% biofuel content in diesel would help in principle but only assuming the net carbon impact is positive after consideration of related deforestation. Unfortunately, recent evidence is calling into question the wisdom of clearing anything other than marginal land where cellulosic ethanol sources may be planted. Otherwise, there is no net gain for the environment in terms of net carbon emissions. And many more people are going hungry in the world as a consequence of fuel crops displacing food crops on various agricultural lands contributing to food inflation as a result of incrementally reduced supply. Proliferation of palm oil plantations to produce biodiesel and pollution emanating from shrimp ponds are affecting mangrove swamps. It is estimated up to half of Thailand's mangroves are gone already, resulting in reductions in the prevalence of species native to mangrove ecosystems. Bangkok is generally only about a meter or two above sea level and is subsiding by about one-tenth of a meter per year. Subsidence is not a linear process so, ceteris paribus, there is no reason to expect the rate of subsidence to remain nearly constant. To us, Bangkok rates as one of the most vulnerable cities on Earth to global warming. Madagascar has a great many species endemic to the island, however, scores of them have become extinct already. A vital effort to halt further deforestation and loss of habitat is supposedly ongoing which is good because up to now they have lost about 90% of their forests. We suggest that tourism is more important to their economy than perceived gains due to numbskulls who clear and burn forest so they can sell more charcoal. Densely populated areas like Antananarivo are very polluted from discharge of raw sewage into water, and sanitation is a big issue. |
| Turkey, Mongolia | These two nations are traditional mineral extraction and processing centers trying to modernize and cope with economies based on commodities like coal, chromium, copper, iron ore and mercury. Coal-fired power generators severely tax air quality. Ulaanbaatar has serious pollution of the atmosphere. |
| Slovenia, Slovakia | Their waterways may as well have been open sewers for mining, metallurgical, chemical and other industries spewing toxic wastes. Acid rain, toxic tailings and acid mine drainage issues have not been resolved. A good start would be to prepare to ban coal particularly the soft (bituminous) coal and brown coal (lignite) industry. |
| Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia, Papua New Guinea | These countries have big problems arising from deforestation, erosion, lack of latrines and water suitable for drinking. Water-borne illness and arsenic poisoning is widespread. Erosion in Cambodia is often associated with unchecked strip mining. Papua New Guinea has troubles with deforestation of tropical rainforest. Dealing with "morning after" implications of free-for-all mining activity in this frontier country has brought much pollution-related grief for its people. Tragically, the clearing of mangrove forests and swampland contributed to the mighty impact of the cyclone and incursion of saltwater striking Myanmar. Through sheer human agony, the Irrawaddy Delta and River area demonstrates again the vulnerability of people, homes and cropland that are near sea level. Perhaps as an independent advisory we are too idealistic. But if there are hundreds of thousands of people in grave peril in Myanmar and there exists a government without the wherewithal or focus to save their own people, we'd have gone in there days ago to help the rescue effort regardless of whether the military junta agrees with us. This would be so even if the government was legitimate. Doctors do not have borders, neither do diseases, air or water pollution. At a time like this, as a consequence of nature's awesome destructive force, our spirituality beckons us all to do what we can to help, and until then, not to be able to rest well at night. |
| South Korea, Romania, Bulgaria | They have various and sundry pollution problems from careless discharge of untreated sewage and industrial effluents. Thermal power plants are still significant sources of sulfur dioxide thereby contributing to increased acidity of rainfall in the surrounding areas. Bulgaria is still working on registering and accounting for the emissions of industrial and other polluters operating within its borders. Clearly, they are not even past square one yet when it comes to stewardship of our environment and the hour is getting late. Among all countries, heavily-industrialized South Korea is currently the ninth largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the world. |
| Niger, Mali, Ethiopia, Guinea, CAR, Republic of the Congo, Burkina Faso, Sierra Leone, Chad, Nepal | With reluctance, we add an additional 10 countries whose people are among about three-quarters of a billion in more than 40 countries worldwide who suffer from inadequate sanitation, a public health problem whose solution is often compounded by shortages of fresh water. The flow of the Niger River, whose drainage area covers one-third of west Africa, has been reduced by about one-half due to population demands on it, climate change, drought, desertification, siltation and pollution. Given that it takes up to 1000 mass units of water to produce one mass unit of food, can more hunger be that far removed for these people? As time goes by and global warming contributes to increased drought, desertification, soil erosion and increased salt content on land and in water, all else being equal, water management shortcomings and human health afflictions are expected to worsen. In general in these places, much water is contaminated through lack of latrines and introduction of raw sewage into the waterways eventually causing transmission of numerous water-borne diseases. Many major cities in these areas are among the most unsanitary locations on Earth. The vast majority of diseases including cholera, typhoid and diarrhea-related ones arise due to poor sanitation. Life expectancy is reduced and infant and child mortality and morbidity are very prevalent especially in Niger, Ethiopia, Guinea, Sierra Leone and Central African Republic. Malaria abounds, for example, in Sierra Leone, perhaps the least developed country on Earth. Clearly, help is very much needed in these places, not for people to look the other way. Foul air from vehicles often adds to the challenges of surviving in places like Brazzaville, Congo; Bamako, Mali and Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Plus, in all these countries, we have significant deforestation challenges. With all this happening, you can hardly expect to add a 3% population growth rate in many of these areas and come away with any conclusion other than that some new macro-scale crisis will emerge before long. |
| Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, Eritrea, Djibouti | These five places are characterized by extreme poverty, overgrazing by herd animals, soil erosion, desertification, incursion by salt and water stress and contamination. Its very difficult for the physical landscape to support the number of people that live there via agriculture, trees or nomadic herding of livestock so risk of malnutrition or starvation is unduly high. People may, as a consequence, try to head to the cities. In Afghanistan, Yemen and Somalia there is widespread use of, interest in, and economic dependence on opium or qat. Especially in Afghanistan and Somalia, there has also been much civil disobedience, clan rivalry, war-lording, violence and corruption that complicates and delays problem resolution. Institutions are often lacking. Yemen has legions of old junker vehicles that still fill up with leaded gasoline. People in Yemen generally do not know if its better to remain inland and face food and water-borne illnesses and insecticide pollution, or to head towards the coast and risk contact with vector-borne disease such as malaria. Organ failure is rife from contaminants and disease. Medically, kidney ailments are worsened by lack of water. Average life expectancy for all these countries is somewhere in the range of 45 to 60 years. Its clear to us these people need help, too. Here we have some advice: Don't despair because you know of those who may have succeeded in the oil business in North Africa and the Middle East yet your family remains very poor. Now there is "Desertec", a brainchild of the German Aerospace Center. The solar power cat is out of the bag now so watch out big oil! The drive will be to spread solar thermal throughout the Sahara, Mojave, Gobi and Arabian deserts, too. We call it "Desert Sun". So reopen and expand your salt mines young man for, quite suddenly, salt and heat are your two most prize assets! Solar thermal uses equipment like turbines, water and other fluid pipes, transmission lines, parabolic mirrors and other mirrors and lenses. Plus they require tanks of molten salt to store heat at night for perhaps several hours before the energy is utilized to generate steam, drive turbines, generate and transmit electricity over large distances. Furthermore, molten salt is the breakthrough ionic fluid medium that can more efficiently produce cellulosic source material into ethanol, with a much reduced waste stream from the process. As well, additional solar infrastructure through use of concentrated photovoltaic panels is very possible. We plan to put our weight and resolve behind desert heat and solar power to provide us with a significant part of our green growth. |
| Senegal, Cameroon, Cote d'Ivoire, Mauritania, Swaziland, Lesotho, The Gambia, Liberia, Benin, Togo, Gabon | This category is unusual and alarming in its own right because environmental impacts are apparently contributing to creation of newly-hungry people. Deforestation and desertification are present here, too. However, there are other factors including overgrazing, soil erosion, poaching, energy and food inflation, changes in rainfall and flood patterns and reduced flow and carrying capacity of rivers that contribute to shortages of fish catches, grains and other food for many people. In The Gambia, a riparian society, water-borne diseases and ailments have been especially prevalent. Togo and Benin are very reliant on river water quality, too. They also need to watch out for poachers. Deforestation has been devastating for Cote d'Ivoire. Sandstorms and drought episodes are often acute in Mauritania. Drought has also affected Lesotho and Swaziland. Where there is a shortage of water, a food shortage may soon follow. We recently came across a claim that the upper 20% wealthiest people in the world eat 16 times as much food as the poorest 20%. 16 times as much! We hope it isn't true. |
Comment
January 10, 2008 - Let us first say we have great respect and admiration for the people of China. We appreciate the epic constraints and challenges they face. This only underscores why in the Middle East for example, people must overcome or set aside their differences. Because time has come today, and now coal is on the way out as a convenient resource to enhance energy security. It has been shown that climate security trumps energy security, poverty, social justice and welfare. You cannot achieve a harmonious society anywhere if you are ravaging the environment. If you are overdriving your headlights, you have to slow down, at least until you have the technology that enables you to replace those headlights, now permitting you to drive faster again. Well, coal cannot be powering those headlights in this day and age. Clean coal is an oxymoron in our opinion. Irrespective of how much coal you have, putting ever-more resources into its development will inevitably result in diminishing or even negative returns on investment when you factor in the costs of all related externalities. Which is why the Chinese government currently proposed "second plan", whereby companies in China would pay a tax according to how much pollutant they have generated, is music to our ears. We strongly support it. Once all those mechanisms are developed and in place to implement such an externality tax, the government can monitor the situation closely and ratchet up the magnitude of that tax as required to achieve the desired affect. This will stem the tide of money going into coal projects which then in principle are available for projects involving other forms of energy. Projects that coal investors looking for some quick and easy, "risk-free" Renminbi probably never stopped to think carefully about. How's the prairie switchgrass situation in rural China?
See the bottom of Know Your Client page for our other commentaries.
Comment On Carbon Separation, Capture and Sequestration
January 26, 2008 - If Alberta were a country not a province of Canada, it would be the nation with the highest per capita greenhouse gas emissions on Earth. By far. The vast majority of countries are now hot on the trail of having to do something dramatic to curb pollution and prevent climate change from becoming worse than it already is. But not Alberta. Their current environmental plan is for no reduction, rather a sharp increase to 2020 as heavy oil output triples and more than $100 billion of new tar sands developments are contemplated. At that point, the Alberta government is claiming it will be feasible to capture and store carbon dioxide emissions underground in "caverns" using technology that now exists. We beg to differ. We are aware that governments in US, UK, EU, China, Canada, Norway, Australia, UAE and other countries are investigating the viability of carbon separation, capture and sequestration (storage) below ground. However, as registered Investment Advisor for 8 years and practicing geophysical engineer and geoscientist for several years before that, we advise that in our opinion this particular slate of technologies is in the borderline geo-fantasy stage. There is no evidence on any commercial scale anywhere whether its in the interstices of sandstone, shale, basalt, in salt formations or anywhere else that carbon dioxide can be stored reliably subsurface. Of course, many heavy oil sands projects in northern Alberta were initially approved without consideration of the environmental externality costs of the vast quantities of pollutants being thrown off by their projects. That's now their problem and we do not feel sorry for them and we do not want them to try to pass us the bill for their mistakes.
We further reject the idea that vast volumes of carbon dioxide greenhouse gases from the tar sands can be separated, piped and utilized in carbon dioxide flooding reservoir stimulation to enhance production in old oil and gas fields. First of all, just separating and capturing carbon dioxide is a very costly, energy intensive process unto itself. Then you have to pipe it to points all over the map sheet so it can be used. If carbon dioxide flooding is appropriate at all for a particular reservoir the amounts you would be injecting would be many orders of magnitude less than what's available from the tar sands. If you try to force an excess amount of CO2 into a gas reservoir for example, the carbon dioxide content of the gas should stay below a maximum of about 2%. Otherwise, the gas does not burn cleanly or efficiently. So you would just be passing off a big gas processing problem to the refinery if say you loaded the gas with up to 10% carbon dioxide in an attempt to get rid of more CO2. They have not solved the environmental challenge at all, they have just shifted the culpability to another point along the waste stream associated with heavy oil production. The carbon still ends up in the atmosphere.
Another alternative, mass storage of carbon dioxide gas underground via injection wells, shut-in wells, newly-drilled wells, whatever, is hugely expensive and again energy intensive. And there is absolutely no guarantee that, for example, the gas once forced under pressure into some pinpoint porosity sandstone formation 1000 meters below the surface would stay there indefinitely without any leakage, leaching, disruption from other borehole drilling nearby, seismic rumbling, faulting, gravitational creep and so on. And this storage procedure would have to be played out innumerable times in various locations to have any hope of accommodating the gargantuan quantity of greenhouse gases emanating from the tar sands. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant? Try telling that to survivors of the incident where hundreds of people were fatally-gassed while living quietly on a hillside village in Africa when suddenly an enormous cloud of carbon dioxide descended over them. This was reported to be the result of a catastrophic leakage of carbon dioxide along zones of weakness and crevices in the bedrock nearby.
In our judgment, the entire scheme is a pipe dream, a real long shot and we will not be investing a wooden nickel in any entity that's connected with carbon separation, capture and sequestration. Which brings us to our next point. The very fact that governments far and wide are picking up huge shares of the tab on behalf of sunset industries such as coal mining, coal-fired power and heavy oil sands developers in order to try to develop these fledgling technologies indicates to us that those sunset industry players already realize much of what we are saying here - that carbon capture and sequestration is a loser, is fraught with risk, is nowhere near being either economically or technically feasible and is swallowing huge sums of taxpayers money that if anything should be dedicated to development of alternative, cleaner forms of energy. Forms of energy where the proponents of it do not mind paying their own externality costs as opposed to the public having to pay it for outdated energy producers to prop them up. The coal-burning Holocene epoch is over, the Anthropocene has begun.
Comment On Canada, Australia and Venezuela in our Eco-Table
February 28, 2008 - The governments of all 3 of these traditional natural resource extraction economies (Canada, Australia and Venezuela) together with their clubby advisors, bankers and investors, sometimes with organizational relationships built up over 100's of years, are apparently oblivious to the low carbon economy that's already upon us and so they continue to run with blinkers on. The citizenry pay the price as the countries fail to develop and diversify their economies. Those hopelessly tied in to the declining fossil fuels epoch continue to channel public monies into questionable projects looking for a quick fix of cash flow, green whitewash and dead-end jobs.
For example in Canada, certain oil companies and several bank advisers with significant investments in the oil-patch are among those who provide advice to finance ministers. Next, Canada ends up footing the bill to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers money to pay for carbon separation, capture, transfer and sequestration underground ("CSCS"; also see our commentary on this topic in the previous section). The public are compliant or oblivious to all this because they assume the technology must be: 1)something quite new, 2)viable, 3)commercial, or pretty close to being commercial, 4)low risk, 5)safe, 6)an effective way to lower greenhouse gas emissions, and 7) preferable, because these wizards are doing it, to take this aggressive and hideously expensive action to prolong use of dirty fuel and power, even though those particular commodities are headed down considerably faster than a super majority of people anticipate, and spend all this money on CSCS, that must be far better than the null case of just waiting at no charge for some researcher somewhere who is an actual wizard, to figure out how to reduce a huge greenhouse gas problem into an ingredient for baking a cake as opposed to baking the Earth. Now we are not registered to advise Canadians, Australians or Venezuelans but we can advise our American friends our opinion is the replies to that set of assumptions the general public likely harbor about CSCS are: 1)wrong, 2)wrong, 3)wrong, 4)wrong, 5)wrong, 6)wrong and 7)wrong. hmmmmm
We are aware that Statoil (now StatoilHydro) of Norway has been aggressively pursuing carbon separation, capture and underground sequestration for more than a decade at tremendous expense. They are nowhere near a solution to store carbon dioxide underground and cannot yet claim or anticipate with any reasonable degree of certainty that a feasible solution will ever exist. Research conducted in USA along those lines as far as we know is in a similar state, and nothing has been demonstrated to work on anything like a commercial scale. As far back as the late 1970's, we personally talked to and received paperwork and presentations from PanCanadian Petroleum (predecessor company to EnCana) engineers during a time when they were spending huge amounts of Company dollars on carbon-dioxide reservoir flooding schemes in Weyburn, Saskatchewan. We believe this location will emerge as one major "partner" site for the recently-announced Federal Government funding of $240 million for Sask Power for a carbon sequestration venture. Government of Saskatchewan has to match these dollars so now the public is in for $480 million plus another $98 million announced by the Government of BC for similar objectives - research and experimentation with respect to carbon separation from fossil fuel sources, carbon capture, transit, then burial and sequestration somewhere. So the total is now $578 million plus what the Alberta Government contributes to such efforts, an amount that could be huge. We have examined a lot of investment material over the years and we've noticed that companies tend to pay for their own R & D. Sure, government occasionally help early stage situations but very little should be put into mature industries.
All of this money is being thrown into a crapshoot game at sunset in an attempt to prolong the viability of fossil fuel investments for a few years longer. Global warming and climate change mean the fossil fuel industry is winding down over many years, to be replaced by other forms of energy. The only question that is outstanding is how fast will it wind down. As such, we predict this CSCS "research" will turn out to be at least a three-quarter of a billion dollar boondoggle unless Canadians can stop it. And we think Canadians should request access to the documents supporting these decisions, you know, its their business and its good to have transparency and openness in government. We think citizens of each of these 3 countries will agree in general that resource extraction companies riding years of lush profits and a commodity price boom should pay as they go for their own research and development, their own technology gambles, their own drilling and to clean up their own pollution mess including carbon dioxide emissions. If they don't want to, quit the business, we don't need your old world jobs, OK? Governments should retain that $3/4 billion to do things government are supposed to do, not pad the bank accounts of oil, gas and coal companies, power utilities and other "partner" corporations.
Each one of these countries is a competitive laggard overall in no small part due to mind-numbing focus on certain industrial segments at the exclusion of many others. Let's review how we say its should have worked: Once Company "c1" exits the energy "e1" industry segment because there is no CSCS bailout for them, there will be entity "c2" arriving on the scene before long involving new people "p2" and jobs "j2" applying some technology "t2" to adjust for any perceived or actual incremental supply shortfall in fuel or electrical power by bringing to market form of energy "e2" at a price "p2". If government intervenes, finances, controls, regulates in favor of particular segments or is otherwise captive-to-industry "i" way of life, then they are systemically forestalling market-driven change, adjustments and alternatives. That distortion hobbles the progression of the country and continually favors certain people and organizations who, it so happens, have taken a job within the current establishment social network rather than with other competitors. These other competitors may have risked a lot of time, money and effort developing alternative technologies, products and services for the marketplace only to have the invisible and fair hand of the marketplace slapped down by influencers who really do not relish open competition.
We further believe this repetitive blocking of the natural course of evolution of markets that occurs in Canada, Australia and Venezuela occurs relatively more frequently there than in many other countries. We also think it is a prominent root cause of why pollution problems in these three countries have escalated to the grim per capita levels that exist. It is, in short, due to the lobbying ability of those who profit from fossil fuels. Above all else, those people just want to keep it going, damn the torpedoes. That social force ultimately causes these nations to head in the wrong direction. Every day they wake up and say "it isn't true", and guess what, they fall further behind.
Try forgetting about fossil fuels altogether for a period of time. Then ask "what's next"? Well, the first order of business for each country is to tend to a monumental clean up just to get back to somewhere near the state they were in before. Also cross-border environmental liability issues should be resolved. We think its often quite obvious who is guilty in