Green (Living) Review

AN OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTION TO THE ENVIRONMENT

Peter Ainsworth MP is the the CIWEM’s new Environmental Parliamentarian of the Year

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

The Politician of the Year 2005, Peter Ainsworth MP, has now added the CIWEM’s Environmental Parliamentarian of the Year Award to his collection of accolades.

At the CIWEM’s Parliamentary Reception on 9h November, President of the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) Ken Shapland praised Peter for his outstanding contribution to environmental understanding. This includes Peter’s current role as Chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Groups for the Environment and Sustainable Aviation, and his past position as Shadow Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Peter has also introduced the Green Energy (Definition and Promotion) Bill to Parliament, is a Director of Plantlife International, and a Vice President of Wildlife and Countryside Link. In recognition of his work on the environment, Peter Ainsworth was awarded the Public Affairs News 'Politician of the Year' award in 2005.

For the second year running, Huw Irranca-Davies MP, Minister for the Natural and Marine Environment, Wildlife and Rural Affairs, presented the CIWEM’s Environmental Parliamentarian of the Year Award. He told the audience of Ministers, MPs, Lords and senior environmentalists that: “the CIWEM has chosen to recognise Peter’s long and illustrious parliamentary career and his dedication to environmental affairs. Peter is a passionate champion of the environment and a knowledgeable one too. He is vocal and continues to be active, not least through his ongoing work with Plantlife International and the Wildlife and Countryside Link. Peter’s dedication to green issues is an inspiration to all of his parliamentary colleagues across all the political parties and to the wider public too. The CIWEM’s Environmental Parliamentarian of the Year Award shows how parliament is starting to have a track record in making a positive difference to the environment and I am delighted to present this thoroughly well deserved award to Peter.”

On accepting the CIWEM Environmental Parliamentarian of the Year Award, Peter said: “I believe in politics enabling progressive organisations such as CIWEM to deliver solutions to our environmental challenges, and it is terrific to have my role recognised. I am absolutely delighted to accept what is a serious honour from a serious institution.”

The award ceremony was accompanied by the launch the CIWEM’s Manifesto – ‘Fitting The Bill: A Manifesto for Environmental Action’, which offers pragmatic solutions for all political leaders to a wide range of environmental challenges including climate change, food security, population, and water scarcity, as well as some of the amazing photographs from the CIWEM’s Environmental Photographer of the Year competition, an international showcase for the very best in environmental photography.

The evening was sponsored by Carter Environmental and Morrison Construction.

The GREEN (LIVING) REVIEW would like to add our congratulations to those of all the other and thank the Hon Peter Ainsworth, MP, for his contribution to the fight for the environment and a greener future for us and our children.

EIB FUNDS FOR SOUND WIND ENERGY PROJECTS

European Investment Bank to authorize £700 million in matched loans for onshore wind developments

Three UK banks involved

Lending scheme designed to tackle lack of project finance

BWEA report shows extent of problem

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

The British Wind Energy Association (BWEA), the UK’s leading renewable energy association, welcomed the EIB backed Government plan to inject much needed liquidity into the onshore wind development market. The measure announced in April’s Budget and coming into force today is set to free-up a total of £1.4 billion, as the £700 million in EIB funds will be matched by a further £700 million from the three commercial banks involved. The funds are aimed specifically at wind farms with planning permission.

Maria McCaffery, BWEA Chief Executive, said: “Wind energy has never been a risky investment. In fact, wind farms in the UK have never defaulted on their loans. However, the recent turbulence in the financial markets has affected availability of loan finance for smaller and medium sized projects. The funds announced today will be particularly important role in bringing forward a host of sound projects, by developers with a proven track record in wind energy delivery."

Research conducted by New Energy Finance on behalf of BWEA shows that while investment in wind energy on balance sheet has increased from £212 million in 2007 to £920 million in 2009, project finance in the same period has decreased from £336 million to £54 million. Statistics show that there is a strong pipeline of onshore projects with planning approvals in the UK, totaling 756MW in construction and 3056MW with consent.

“There is no reason why the UK’s wind energy sector should not be as successful as those of our European neighbors, particularly given our wind resources. The initiative launched today should go a long way towards addressing one side of the delivery problem. We now need a bold strategy to resolve planning, so that we can make good on our promise to deliver 15% of energy from renewables by 2020,” commented McCaffery.

One of the main obstacles that I see, however, to the UK's wind energy sector being as successful as our European neighbors is the lack of political will to puch such projects through and also the obstacles that are put in the way of turbines, large and even small one for small wind, by the NIMBYs and it is the NIMBYs that the Members of Parliament and local councilors listen to because they are their voters.

Other countries have different systems and in some countries of Europe renewable energy and all things green have such a high standing that there are no objections about and also, in some cases, none possible because of the government legislation that have been framed in such as way that renewable energy projects always have a priority over anything.

Waiting on a Train – Book Review

Review by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Waiting on a Train
The Embattled Future of Passenger Rail Service
A Year Spent Riding Across America
by James McCommons
304 pages paperback 6” x 9”
ISBN: 9781603580649
Published by: Chelsea Green Publishing October 20, 2009
Price: $17.95

The book “Waiting on a Train” is the story of a passenger rail journey by the author across the United States via the Amtrak long-distance passenger rail service during an entire year, and the author's observations and also the various talks he has had with people involved with the railroads.

From reading this book it becomes rather evident that Britain made the same mistakes as regards to the railroad system the USA did, though some years later under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher,

The only difference between the USA and Britain is that the UK destroyed a relatively well working and affordable passenger rail system and created a “private” one via franchises, none of which, bar one or two, run well, on time, and with value for money.

“Waiting on a Train” is a well written book in which the author, James McCommons, makes the valid call for the resurrecting the nearly dead long-distance passenger rail service in America and also for better goods trains.

Being a non-car driver and -owner I am a great lover and advocate of trains, passenger and good, and this book speaks to my innermost being.

The only way passenger rail services work and will work properly ever at a decent cost to the traveling public, that is to say, fares that the ordinary person can afford if they are in public ownership. Yes, we are talking here about the “N” word, the word called “nationalization”.

Only a proper nationalized public passenger rail service that can offer low fares – even if this be supported by taxes – will ever encourage people to leave their cars at home and use the train, for commuting and, especially, for long-distance travel, or to entice them to desert the plane for the train. For me there would never be a contest; I prefer the train to the plane any time.

The old, the nationalized British railroad service, British Rail, worked just on principle similar to that when it came to passenger transportation at least. That was until British Rail (BR) was destroyed by the government of Margaret Thatcher.

Are the railways the answer to our transportation needs?

The answer, short and sweet, to this, is “yes”, but to all intents and purposes, so it least it would seem, only a nationalized system of sorts will make this possible.

The entire railways system – in the UK and elsewhere – should be in public ownership and have no private shareholders of any kind. Private shareholders, in the main, when it comes to passenger rail systems, utilities, and whatever else, put profit before anything else, and that almost always.

Trains are green and outperform cars and planes alike.

I have greatly enjoyed this book and can all but agree with the “findings” of the author as far as the need for a nationalized railway system in the USA (and elsewhere) and the sooner this is understood by the powers-that-be and citizens alike the better for all of us and especially the environment.

Well run trains at affordable fares will be a way that people can be enticed out of the cars and even out of planes and the environmental footprint of an individual's rail journey as compared to the same journey by car would be that much smaller.

Now let's hear it for the train.

Solar cell phone chargers and others

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

So far it would appear that there is a lot of talk and hype about such gadgets but not much substance to them. I have yet to see one of those chargers that, in our latitudes, actually does its job properly.

I have seen a number of those devices so far though have yet to get my hands on one of those for a proper test and review.

What I have seen so far, however, is definitely nothing to write home about, as none of those, especially not, as I said, our latitudes, where the sun is normally not high enough in the sky for most of the time and also not reliable enough.

All those solar chargers can do in places such as the UK, etc. is to give a small boost to a cell phone's battery and that is it.

While those chargers may work inf the sunny places in the south, such as the Mediterranean , the Middle East, Africa, Australia and such, in most of Europe and North America they are all but useless.

The same is also true, as I have found, with solar charged flashlights of all kinds.

While they charge well enough in summer in Britain, as long as the sun is in the sky long enough, come Fall, Winter and in Spring, however, and the solar panel just cannot produce enough energy to charge the batteries which may, or may not, be removable.

The same problem also exists with solar, aka photo-voltaic, cells (solar panels) on roofs here in the northern latitudes in those months.

Wind and water is a much more reliable source and that is why small wind is going to be very important in Britain, I should think, in the future. However, one cannot use wind and water with cell phone chargers of a portable nature really.

Having said that, there are some small wind-powered charges for cell phones on the market nowadays but, as far as I am concerned, they are only gimmicks really and of no real use. I mean, seriously, how long do you want to hold your arm up into the wind with one of those devices?

The truth is that very few of such things, aside from human-powered devices, are of use in places such as Britain and North America. Maybe someone could design one on the principle of the pedal-powered ones for the military radio communication, but small and the pedals be turned by hand, How about it, designers?

Time, methinks, to reevaluate those “green” gadgets.

Help – I cannot stop upcycling!

Do I have a problem?

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

From early childhood that what we now call “upcycling” and recycling has been part of my life.

Reusing items that others would regards as rubbish, as trash, as waste, and reworking those was the usual thing for us in our family and I must say that I have, to this day, retained this “trait”, for lack of a better word.

To be perfectly honest it has so much become part of my life and my fabric that I look at every, or at least nearly every, item that would fall under the term trash and should go into the garbage can or one of the recycling bins with the questions “can I use this for something” or what can I make with this/out of this” always in my mind.

Some people, in fact, might regards me as having become obsessive in this way and department and this has not just come about with the talk about climate change and having to conserve resources. It has been with me for a very long time, as said; the obsession too.

We have had, in our family, and I do not think this was just because we were Gypsy, the “waste not, want not” philosophy and also the attitude that one person's rubbish may be the resource for us to make to make some money.

Personally, I try not to put anything into the trash or the recycling bins that might be reusable or re-workable, that is to say, upcyclable. The major problem with this attitude, though, is that one needs a rather large barn where to store all those things that could be reused and re-worked and those that just might come in handy some day to make something with or from.

So, do I have a problem?

I have now also – and in fact that is not entirely new with me either – taken to make my own notebooks and a writer can never be without one, from scrap paper, that is to say, from single-side printed pages, whether press releases or letters or whatever. I am also making my own business- and calling cards from various kinds of card stock, such as cereal packs, and similar, and then use an IDEAL 200 stamp to print the details upon the cut up cards.

Glass jars, cookie tins (metal and plastic), and others, are all kept for storage purposes and many times tin cans too get re-purposed and upcycled, like into pencil bins (for the desk) and such like.

I just loathe to see anything that may have a use, however remotely, as it is, or with a little re-working, to get thrown into the trash or even the recycling bins and I also find myself rescuing things that other people have thrown out or lost.

As I said before, it probably has become an obsession but it also means that there are quite a few things that I do not have to send money on as I make them myself by upcycling and if I had the time I guess I would do more of that even.

While it can become an obsession that could last for the rest of one's life it is great fun, I think, and useful fun at that.

So, what's the diagnosis? Do I have a problem?

Has Global Warming hijacked the environmental agenda?

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

“Global Warming”, now renamed, more appropriate, into “Climate Change”, is important but it would appear though that we are concentrating far too much on that one aspect and not enough of other environmental issues, be they deforestation and general loss of habitat; air pollution from vehicles, factories, etc.; species loss; and many more.

We are on about recycling and such all the time, and rightly so, for we are running out of holes in the ground where to dump all the trash and waste that we produce, but too many times with reference to CO2 emissions and such and not with regards to the environmental impact that our wasteful lives have.

It is not just the trash; it is the consumption to which we are even encouraged by the governments in order to stimulate the economy in times of economic problems.

When people suggested that the 2008/2009 financial and economic crisis would be an idea to scale back consumption the governments nigh on labeled all those that were not going out to spend the way our of the crisis as “terrorists”.

However, in general, the Climate Change agenda definitely is becoming detrimental to the rest of the environment and the movement.

What good is it if we save the Planet, so to speak, if at all we can, from warming up, because this could be a natural cycle and we do not even know how a changed climate will or will not impact on human life and life in general, when the biodiversity is destroyed because we were not watching that.

While we scream about the destruction of tropical rainforests, many, presently, so we can get bio-diesel from palm oil, the boreal forests are left to be exploited and destroyed by the the likes of Kimberly-Clark in Canada. We do not even want to talk about the Alberta tar sands now where a huge area of boreal forest was destroyed in order to get to this source of oil.

Climate Change and fight against it – which may be futile if it is, as I, and also eminent scientists, believe a natural cycle of the Planet, one that Earth follows every now and then on a more or less regular basis.

As they say “Man proposes but G-d disposes” and whether you believe in a G-d, like the Abrahamic one or a multiple of g-ds does not matter here, I think. The point is that if it is a natural cycle of Mother Earth than we have no chance to “stop” it. We then must adapt to it or, well, die.

On the other hand, there are ways we can live much lighter on the Earth and we must do that for Climate Change – and yes, the climate definitely does seem to be in turmoil all over the globe – is but one thing.

Much of the destruction of the Planet's biospheres and habitats has nothing to do with a changing climate but everything with what man has been doing and is doing.

Climate Change or Global Warming is not destroying the rainforests; loggers are and ranchers. The boreal forests are not destroyed by the climate but by greed of man, yet again, for paper, mostly toilet tissue and paper towels. Is this necessary.

Does the paper industry really have too use wood from often virgin forests for making toilet paper? I do not think so. Here 100% recycled could, in fact, be used very well and the same as regards too paper towels.

When it comes to paper for writing and printing then there would also be other fiber options, such as hemp and nettle. However, a great amount of wood for paper pulp is, in fact, grown in commercially managed forests and those would, often, not even exist were it not for the industry.

We bemoan the huge garbage patch in the Pacific ocean that is full of plastic. That also has nothing to do with Climate Change and will not affect the climate of the world either. It is, however, a danger to sea creatures and hence something should be done about it and it should be cleared. All efforts are, however, directed to “fighting” Climate Change. Helloooo!!! Someone out there???

Even if we can stop the change in the climate what will it benefit us if we have lost the Earth as we knew it?

The best thing would be we went and had a close look at the way the likes of the Native Americans and also the Romani-Gypsy of old lived – in harmony with Mother Earth.

It was the Gypsy who was the first recycler, proper, before we even ever had coined the word. The Gypsy was also the first upcycler, for profit, in that he would take items that were regarded as waste and fashion salable goods from those.

Old broken knives were reworked and then, fitted with sheaths from waste leather goods or leather offcuts from industry, sold on markets. Tin cans made into this and that. From bits of wood offcuts toys were made and old leather was made into items for the market too. Willow and hazel rods were made into clothes pegs, pegs which outperform any modern spring ones by decades and decades.

When the Gypsy used natural wild materials to make things with, be this hazel or will for the making of clothes pegs, or oak and elm for the making of tent pegs, or elder for the making of wooden flowers, he would never take more than he needed and never from one area more than once in a year.

Modern man, on the other hand, exploits Nature and this is the same when it comes to farming as to mining and other activities.

The reason we have a carbon problem, aside from the wholesale deforestation that has been going on ever since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, is the destruction of the soil.

The soil is one of the greatest sequesters of carbon, but only healthy soil. Throwing chemical fertilizers at it may help crops to grow, to a fashion, but does nothing to the heath of the soil.

These and many more are all aspects of environmental problems the tackling of which is being forgotten because all the energy is being directed to “combating” Climate Change.

I think it is time that we stopped worrying the Climate Change bone and looked at other, equally important, environmental issues, and that now.

Bike-riding Rabbis will promote green living

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Nine Rabbis are preparing to take part in a bike ride starting in Edgware to promote green living, on Sunday, December 6, 2009.

JewCycle is being led by Rabbis of the United Synagogue to highlight the need for sustainable living in the community, a day before the Copenhagen Climate Conference next.

The event has been organized by Rabbi Natan Levy of the Shenley synagogue. The even will start at the Edgware synagogue in Watford Way and will be taking a leisurely nine mile route to the Radlett synagogue.

Raymond Raven, who is supplying electric bikes to some of the Rabbis to help them complete the course, said: “They really want to show just how easy it is for people to help the environment.”

The ride is open to the community and anyone interested in attending can contact Rabbi Levy on nzlevy@gmail.com. Spare bikes are available on a first come first served basis.

But why would you require one of those. Sure everyone has a bicycle of their own? No? Why not?

We need to get much more serious, all of us, Jews and Gentiles alike, as regards to sustainable transport and there is nothing as sustainable as cycling and walking.

This is not just because the change in climate may, to some degree, have something to do with the crap that we are chucking into the air; getting out of the car and walking and cycling also is good for our health in that it makes and keeps us fit and it cleans the air in town and country from exhaust pollution.

Eight! So, get you bike out and join the Rabbis and show that you care.

Christmas Baubles from SUCK UK – Product Review

CHRISTMAS DECLARATIONS

A Dead Thoughtful Product

CHRISTMAS DECLARATIONS
6 Grenade Christmas Tree Decorations
Price: £20.00 for a set

Chestnuts are roasting and the halls are decked, oh ‘tis the season to be jolly… Unless, perhaps, you are one of the millions who exist silently in an often forgotten reality. In a bid to encourage people to think further than just tinsel, Turkey and Christmas cake, youth initiative Ctrl.Alt.Shift has developed a unique seasonal tree decoration: delicate glass baubles, which are actually replica hand grenades.

Designed by Dorothy for Ctrl.Alt.Shift, and produced by Suck UK, the 'Christmas Declarations' will add sparkle to any branch, whilst offering a reminder that the time of year does not bring cheer to all.

Ctrl.Alt.Shift is an experimental initiative politicizing a new generation of activists for social justice and global change. Using creativity, photography, film, stories, illustrations and music, it aims to give a voice to the silent majority.

Those Christmas Grenades are a poignant reminder to all that live in relatively peaceful lands that not everywhere in the world there is peace and goodwill towards men during this season, not even in the so-called Holy Land.

Packaged in sets of six, the limited edition decorations are available from stores worldwide.

While they look to all intents and purposes like the glass pine cones that used to decorate Christmas trees often the grenades are, in fact, made of chromed plastic. Therefore, a little warning note here: DO NOT GET THEM NEAR REAL CANDLES. I know that some people still use real trees and real candles and hence please place those Christmas Grenades not anywhere close candles.

I must say that I think those Christmas grenades to be great thought provoking decorations for the tree and I wonder whether we could come up with something similar as to other pressing issues.

While they are not cheap at £20 for a set of six they are worth it, I think,as they will act as a reminder to everyone who sees them as to the real life beyond our comfortable existence in the developed world and to the fact that while we celebrate other people, many of them children, are dying in conflicts and wars. Also, with each pack purchased you will be making a contribution to Ctrl.Alt.Shift's fight against global conflict.

GENUINELY CLEAN ENERGY MIX NEEDED

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

Whilst the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) applauds the Government’s commitment to combat climate change and to ensure energy security, the Institution believes that Britain can meet its targets without building new nuclear power stations. And although the aim for no new coal-fired power stations to be built without carbon capture and storage (CCS) is well intentioned, very significant questions remain unanswered regarding its ability to help reduce our carbon emissions.

Because of concerns over the disposal of radioactive waste, the wider carbon emissions of uranium extraction and processing, and a lack of clarity regarding the availability of economically extractable uranium reserves, the CIWEM does not support Ed Miliband's statement that nuclear power is a “proven, reliable source of low carbon energy.” And the Government’s belief in clean coal technology may be misguided as it is still not known if it is possible to convert unproven CCS technology into an affordable reality that can work on the scale required to make a difference in tackling climate change.

As an environmental journalist I also have to say that in my view nuclear is not an option and a route that Britain – nor other countries – should take as especially the storage of spent fuels is on of the greatest concerns, to me, as well as to most of the population.

“Clean” coal – and now there is a misnomer – also is, in my opinion, not a route that we should be going as the capture and storage of the carbon is an unproved technology and one that could easily backfire should there be the slightest flaw in it.

Instead, the CIWEM believes that we need a radical increase in our supply of renewable energy, with electricity generation virtually de-carbonised by 2030, and increased investment in energy efficiency measures. In the CIWEM’s recently published Manifesto, the Institution calls for the fast-tracking of offshore wind, wave and tidal energy production, with work to deliver a renewables-friendly grid being a strong priority for the next Government.

De-carbonising electricity generation is a relatively low-cost option and would make a major contribution to targets. An evolving energy mix is required, with an increasing proportion of low-carbon and renewable fuels and methods of generation. Offshore wind, wave and tidal technologies are existing or emerging technologies which can harness some of the UK’s most abundant renewable energy sources on a large scale, ensuring greater security of supply. Renewable energy derived from the nation’s waste and using advanced technologies must also be promoted.

Nick Reeves, Executive Director of CIWEM says: “We need a new approach to energy use that is rooted in environmental sustainability. The UK’s accessible offshore wind resource is potentially among the greatest in the world, and with a large tidal range and wide ocean swell window, we also has very significant tidal and wave resources.”

“Like a craven alchemist, Ed Miliband promises a new era of energy from coal without any idea of whether it is possible, and nuclear is based on a finite resource that pollutes and perpetuates the current inefficient pattern of electricity generation. As it stands, the Government’s proposal would deflect scarce resources and attention away from the real solutions: renewables and energy efficiency. Many millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money will be diverted to developing uncertain technologies that could be better and more productively invested in technologies that actually work and provide a genuinely clean and sustainable source of energy.”

Renewable energy, and here, in the UK, wind would be one of the primary candidates as we do have our fair share of wind – most of the time. Other options too could be utilized, including methane from landfill sites and sewage works and also, and especially, micro-generation of electricity by the latter means and also the former, on farms, smallholdings and such like. Small wind also would work well on apartment blocks.

If Spain can manage to have 50% of all its energy needs met by just wind then I am sure that the same could be achieved in the UK. The political will does seems to be lacking, however.

Having said that, though, we must change the way that we generate electricity and we much change the voltage in use and bring power generation (once again) closer to the consumer, thus removing the need for the high voltages in which we currently produce electricity.

I am sure, however, that it can be done.

Refineries Across U.S. Closing Due to Weak Fuel Demand

by Michael Smith (Veshengro)

WILMINGTON, Delaware – Refineries from New Mexico to New Jersey are under severe economic pressure due to falling demand for fuel, with a number of facilities having shut down in recent months.

Valero Energy Corp., which temporarily shuttered a major refinery over the summer, said that it would permanently close its Delaware City oil refinery and lay off 550 workers.

That makes this the largest largest refinery in the United States to close this year.

Refineries in the Northeast are particularly vulnerable because many are older, operate less efficiently and must compete with gasoline imported from Europe.

The Delaware City refinery, where workers were notified of the closing on Friday, November 20, 2009, lost about $1 million every day this year, Bill Day, the spokesman for Valero said.

Demand for fuel has been falling for some time and the recession has made things worse, squeezing profit margins for refiners everywhere.

Refiners are pulling capacity offline and are now operating at levels more consistent with the aftermath of a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico.

El Paso, Texas-based, Western Refining Inc. announced earlier this month that it would close its Bloomfield, N.M., facility, putting 100 people out of work.

Valero, based in San Antonio, said in September that it would idle two units in Delaware City, cutting about 150 jobs. Last month, the company said it would cut another 100 jobs at its Paulsboro, N.J. refinery by the end of the year.

The Paulsboro announcement came just days after Sunoco Inc. said it would indefinitely idle its Eagle Point facility, which employs about 400 workers in New Jersey.

In June Valero shut its refinery in Aruba, which had a capacity of about 275,000 barrels a day.

The Delaware City refinery had a capacity of 210,00 barrels a day.

Valero chairman and CEO Bill Klesse said the company had sought a buyer for the Delaware facility, but found no takers.

"At this point, we have exhausted all viable options," he said.

It is a tough market for any company attempting to unload a refinery.

Rising gasoline prices have already changed the driving habits of Americans and the recession has hastened that trend.

About 30 percent of gasoline demand is closely tied to employment, said Ann Kohler, an analyst with Caris & Co.

The nation's unemployment rate is hovering above 10 percent for the first time in 26 years.

"You've probably seen gasoline demand peak in this country," Kohler said.

Delaware is already wrestling with rising joblessness. The state's unemployment rate has jumped 2 percent this year to 8.7 percent.

"The company's decision to close the refinery leaves us with several problems to solve," said Gov. Jack Markell

Markell said the state needs to help displaced Valero workers while ensuring accountability for the environmental issues related to the refinery closing.

So, while we see refineries close in the United States there are off the British coast tens of oil tankers at anchor.

Those tankers will not be docking and discharging their load, we have been told, because the owners of the vessels, the oil companies, have told them to lay off shore until the prices have risen more.

This is a repetition, of sorts, of the oil crisis of the 1970s, the one that was man-made and never really was, and which was just an attempt to see what people's reactions would be to a lack of gasoline.

Then too fully laden tankers were anchored in the roadstead well off shore so that people would not realize that they were deep in the water and thus could be safely assumed to be fully laden, when the people were being told that no crude was coming through from the Gulf.

On the other hand, prices in the UK are very high, with over $1.50 per liter, making a US gallon about US$6, and people are still using their cars though.

Things are changing, it would seem and some people have changed their traveling habits with some cycling and other walking and other using public transit systems or a combination of all three. In some cases commuting no longer even happens as people are working from home.

No doubt that is refineries are being shut in the USA the same may soon happen in Britain (and elsewhere in Europe) too. Thus putting even more people out of work.