What's Wrong With Christmas???

Image via Wikipedia

The Thought Police in Queensland have struck again with Secret Santa replaced with a "Secret Friend".  According to a report on Channel 7 this evening, teachers at Pacific Pines State School in Queensland have taken political correctness to the extreme.

Over the last 15 years my wife and I have had 9 Christmases while were living in Muslim countries.  Guess what?  Most of the Muslims that you meet in these countries wish you a Merry Xmas and many will give a gift.


Remember, although Muslims don't celebrate Xmas they recognise that Christians do and understand that we will celebrate it.

Image via Wikipedia

Indonesia is the country with the largest Muslim population in the world, Xmas is celebrated and Christians hold all of the usual festivities.

While living in the Middle East, we found that the average Kuwait and Saudi will tolerate the Xmas celebrations as long as they are subdued and respectful of the majority Muslim population.

While living in Tripoli a few years ago, almost all of the Libyans that we knew phoned to wish us a Merry Xmas and while we were out shopping the shop keepers were wishing us a Merry Xmas as we shopped.

So, when these politically correct idiots suggest that we water down the Christmas celebrations in Australia or ANY Christian country tell them to SOD OFF and get a life.  If my wife and I can celebrate Xmas openly in many Muslim countries where we have lived, why can't we celebrate it in Australia??

SA Farmers and Politicians Up In Arms Over Heavy Handed NRM Tactics

Liberal, Independent Family First MPs joined farmers who travelled to a FlagSa rally at Victor Harbor on Sunday to voice concern over the range of powers given to National Resource Management (NRM) Boards around the state. 

NRM employees enjoy greater powers than the South Australian Police Force (SAPOL).  They require no warrant issued by a judge to enter a property or to inspect any financial records relevant to farm operations. 

The NRM legislation also overturns the common law principal of innocent until proven guilty; if the NRM decide that a breach has been committed or a farmer is in any way non-compliant, the onus is on the accused to prove themselves innocent. 

Independent Legislative Council member John Darley said farmers from the Adelaide Hills, Fleurieu, the Mid North, Yorke Peninsula and the West Coast have contacted his office concerned about the NRM powers.

Government and NRM representatives declined an invitation to attend the rally on the weekend.

Other concerns include unrealistic and proscriptive conditions imposed on farmers in managing their land.  Independent MLC Anne Bressington said that the current legislation had “little to do with the environment and was more about revenue raising” while Family First MP Rob Brokenshire commented that the SA Labor Government had a “city centric” approach and understood little of the problems faced by farmers in SA.

Mr Brokenshire is concerned that the State is losing the ability to produce food and suggested that the 2004 NRM act should be renamed The Sustainable Farming and Natural Resources Management Act to balance the needs of farmers with the need to protect the environment.

Mr Caica, Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation, said in an interview aired on the ABC on Sunday night said he had extended invitations to FagSA representatives on numerous occasions to meet and discuss issues.

FlagSa representative and Fluerieu Peninsula cattle breeder Mr Peter Manuel responded: “Mr Caica knows my phone number and the phone number of every member of the FlagSa committee.  We have not received any invitation from him”

Mr John Darley confirmed this in his closing remarks when he stated that his office was in constant communication with Mr Caica’s and that Mr Caica was well aware of the weekend’s meeting and had not extended any invitation to meet with FlagSa representatives.

Farmers and FlagSa will continue to lobby politicians to overturn many of the more onerous provisions of the current legislation.

The Point That Geoff Harvey Is Missing

Geoff Harvey and others are bemoaning the rise in online shopping citing it as one of the reasons sales are down in the retail sector.  He's missing the plot and so are many others.

Harvey Norman probably has one of the better customer service staff in the retail sector and he has started his own online site, but he's the poster child for  the Australian retail sector for bashing online shopping. 

On 30th August 2011, the Melbourne Age reported Harvey Norman results:  

"Net profit after tax increased to $252.26 million in the year to June 30, up from $231.41 million in the previous year.

Revenue was $2.70 billion, compared to $2.45 billion in full year 2010.

Outlook remains cautious"

There's no doubt that the GFC and ongoing instability in financial markets is hurting retail and impacting on consumer confidence but that's not all that's impacting on retail.  GST is currently levied on purchases made oveseas and imported into Australia when they exceed AUD$1,000.

I doubt that the additional 10% GST applied to overseas purchases under AUD$1,000 is the panacea for everything that ails the Australian retail sector.

Here's two classics that I found on the web on why the online industry is booming and retailers are hurting.

1.  Fitting fees when you try out potential purchases.

2.  How GASP , a high fashion retailer handles customer complaints.

I am an online shopper and have been for around 5 years, it all started because I could get better variety from shops in the US.  In some instances the price was near or marginally lower than the prices in Australia with the shipping added, so in my case it was about the experience not the price.

I still shop online using eBay, Amazon and AliBaba purchasing a wide range of good.  In a lot of cases I do save money but mainly it's still about the experience and the variety.

With Christmas coming up and retailers expecting a difficult trading period, perhaps improving customer service skills may have a greater impact than complaining about GST threshold for imported goods.

Treated Sewage, Would You Drink It? (Part 3)

In Part 1 we took a look at why we needed to look at drinking treated sewage and in Part 2 of this article looked at the reasons people wouldn't drink it and some of the places that it is being used today.  

In this final part, I'll share the results of the poll that I ran on LinkedIn.

Image via WikipediaThis is nowhere near as exhaustive as the polls undertaken by more sophisticated methods but it did sample a very wide ranging group of people.

There were responses from Saudi Arabia, the US, the UK, Australia and India as well as several others.  


Respondents were both male and female and came from a wide range of professions and industries.

The responses indicated that 72 percent were in one way or another willing to drink treated sewage, based mostly on the understanding that water is precious and needs to be used more intelligently.

LinkedIn Poll Results:

View the detailed results at LinkedIn

Results for the entire Poll are available on a separate page here.

Clearly, there is still a significant number of people who would not drink treated sewage, however, it seems that most people are pragmatists and believe that we need to seriously consider drinking this water.

Treated sewage needs to be considered as part of the overall strategy for ensuring the security of drinking water in Australia.  That there is still a significant percentage of people for whom "NO" is the only answer should not be overlooked, nor should their concerns be shoved aside in the haste to employ this technology.


That there are a number of operating plants around the world, regularly providing treated sewage for people to drink proves that this can be done in a safe and sustainable manner addressing many of the legitimate health concerns that people have.


Perhaps with a little more time for the operational plants to prove themselves and some education regarding these successful operations, even the most ardent opponents can be swayed.

 

Are These Electric Bikes Sexy Or What?

With everyone wanting to do their bit for the environment, there are some seriously talented and innovative designers out there doing their bit.

Electric bicycles are a serious alternative for inner and near inner urban transport and there are some bikes on the market today that are sleek, sexy and viable forms of transport.

So, here's a few that should turn a few heads if you take one down the road for a spin.

THE BLACKTRAIL

The PG Blacktrail

Whilst not exactly a production model with a limited production run, the Blacktrail manufactured by PG Bikes is a serious beast with a top speed of 100Kmh and a range of 200Km.  This is a unique bike manufactured with carbon fibre, titanium and trimmed in fine leather. 

It's fast, sexy and can take you around town for a couple of weeks on a single charge but with a price tag of around 60,000 Euro, you probably want to either win Lotto or mortgage the house before you place an order.

M55 TERMINUS

The M55 Terminus

The M55 Terminus is the HumVee  of the electric bike world.  It's a hybrid bike designed as a serious cross country machine.  

The M55 has a stated top speed of 60Kmh and is powered by an 8 cell Lithium Ion battery.  Pricing is dependant on specification and finishes as the bike is custom made.

CURRIE PRODUCTS IZIP EXPRESS

The IZIP Express is designed to augment the riders input using Currie EVO Drive technology.

The Evo drive amplifies the rider's input making hills and riding into the wind easier.

With a 750 watt motor and a 36 volt Lithium Ion battery, the bike has a range of 50Km, a top speed of 32Km/hr and at a price of US$3,499 is still pricey but won't break the bank like the first two.

There are of course conversion kits available in Australia but they lack the style of the bikes above.

As attractive and environmentally friendly as these bikes are, in  Australia they can't be ridden as bicycles.  Legislation states that bicycles with motors attached cannot have a motor of more than 200 watts, after that they need to comply with the same Australian Design Rules as motorcycles.

Chemical Treatment Of Rhino Horn May Help Save The Day

Male White Rhino, Waterberg Plateau, Namibia

Treatment of Rhino horn with a chemical cocktail in South Africa has shown two great benefits in the war against poaching.

Initially designed to kill parasites this chemical survives grinding of the horn into powder.  

It induces nausea and vomiting in those who ingest it as part of  traditional medicine and fluoresces pink under airport x-ray scanners meaning that even in the powdered form it is readily identifiable to customs and quarantine inspectors.

Traditional medicine and the use for dagger handles represent the greatest demand for poached Rhino horn.  

Proving that the illegal trade in Rhino horn is truly global, mounted Rhino heads have been stolen from museums across Europe and in the UK.  The EU & the UK have made the sale of antique Rhino horns and mounted Rhino heads illegal.

In Australia there have been reports of vastly inflated prices for mounted Rhino heads.  Early in 2011, Theodore Bruce Auctions announced that a “massive” antique rhino horn trophy with an estimated value of $30,000 to $40,000 fetched a record $112,000 after a bidding war.

There are serious health consequences for the eventual end user of these antique Rhino horns.  In 2010 CITES advised that arsenic was used extensively in the preparation of Rhino horns.

You can learn more about Rhino and conservation efforts to preserve all of the globe's wild Rhino population at www.rhinoconservation.org

Even In Death You Can Be Carbon Neutral

A Scottish based company has come up with a solution to minimising our carbon footprint when we die.  

No more leaching of embalming fluids into the ground or carbons and mercury vapour from amalgam fillings being released to the atmosphere for those who prefer cremation, now you can be RESOMATED.

Resomation is a process developed by Glasgow based Resomation Limited turns your body into a small pile of powder which can be presented to the bereaved in the traditional urn.

The process involves placing the coffin and body in the Resomator, where it is immersed in a water and alkali solution.  The process, known as alkaline hydrolysis, takes around two hours to complete, around the same time as a conventional cremation.

Resomation Limited was the recipient of the James Baird Logie Award for Early Stage Impact Through Innovation in 2010 and also the Jupiter Big Ideas Award in the Observer Ethics Awards. 


The Resomation process has been used in Queensland and Utah and Florida in the US.

Shedding Light On Corruption

Screen shot   http://www.corruptiontracker.org/main

Corruption exists in all countries around the world: there isn't a country in the world where it does not impact on people, business and government.

Corruption perverts justice, undermines democracy  and costs people their businesses, houses and in extreme cases their lives.

A new website focused on shedding light on corruption around the world has been launched in the US.

Corruptiontracker.org aims to capitalise on the burgeoning social media and crowd sourcing phenomena to generate maps and reports of almost real time corruption reports.

According to the Corruptiontracker website: "Corruption Tracker empowers people to report, identify and fight corruption via crowd sourced information sharing and analysis. People will be able to submit reports directly through CorruptionTracker.org via SMS, mobile telephony, and our Internet site. In addition, we will be fully integrated with all the major social networks.  " 

It will be interesting to see how countries with poor human rights records like China and countries like Libya (146)* and Indonesia (110)*  where corruption is part of every day life treat access to this website.

Reports are cross referenced with more conventional and well known sites like Global Integrity.

Image via WikipediaAnalysis of reported corruption from existing open source data streams such as Transparency International and IPaidaBribe provides a method of ensuring that this website is not used as an easy way of spreading rumour and innuendo.

* 2011 Transparency International Rankings

Treated Sewage, Would You Drink It? (Part 2)

Part 1 looked at the why and how of recycling sewage to drinking water.  The technology is operating around the world, effectively and acceptably, for example in a plant in Orange County, California amongst others.

So, what causes resistance to this technology?

"It is quite difficult to get the cognitive sewage out of the water, even after the real sewage is gone."

- Carol Nemeroff, psychologist

So, what does that mean?

Manhole cover, Rome, Italy

Basically it means that despite the fact that the recycled water is purer than normal source water, once it's had poo in it, that thought lingers long after the smell has gone.  This is a problem that needs to be overcome when you think how little fresh water is available in the world.

On a planet that's seventy percent water it is estimated that only 3% of all water is fresh water and of that, with so much tied up in ice caps, glaciers and ice bergs, only 1% of the water is readily available. 

With the burgeoning human population the demand on this precious resource for both drinking and for watering the crops and livestock that will feed us will only increase.

A professor in the US, Brent Haddad thinks that this method of producing fresh water is a rational way forward stopped by irrational objections from the public.  He realised that this was more of a problem for psychologists than engineers. 

In a study of 2000 people he asked why people had such a problem drinking recycled sewage.  His study showed that 60% of those surveyed would not touch this type of water.

Likewise in a 2007 referendum, in Toowoomba in Queensland, Australia, more than 61% of the eligible 60,231 voters voted against the proposal to build a treatment plant to augment their water supply.  This is despite the fact that the city had experienced severe water restrictions that banned the use of town water on lawns, and eventually gardens and potted plants.

However, there are places in the world where this is being done today.

Windhoek, the capital of Namibia uses recycled water for drinking water during times of drought.

The South African cities of Scottsdale, Pretoria and Cape Town rely on indirect schemes, where recycled sewage is introduced back into a river, dam or aquifer.  There it mixes with the rest of the water before being retreated for drinking, effectively taking the poop factor out of the equation.

In Singapore, about 1% of recycled sewage water is used for drinking.

Perth water Corporation advanced treatment plant

In Perth in Western Australia, the Perth Water Corporation has a pilot plant operating producing drinking quality water.  They are removing the “poo” factor by discharging into aquifers where it co-mingles with ground water and is later pumped out and treated as part of the normal supply.

Approval to discharge was granted on 9th November 2010 and as at the end of August 2011, 872 megalitres have been injected into aquifers.

The trial is being overseen by the WA Department of Health, WA Department of Water and WA Department of Environment and Conservation.   

It is partly-funded by the Australian Government’s Water For the Future initiative.

Using LinkedIn, I asked my contacts to answer the following question from 4 options:

WOULD YOU DRINK TREATED SEWERAGE?

1.      No way, no matter how it was treated

2.      Yes, water is precious we should reuse

3.      Maybe, if it was mixed with pure water

4.      Only water is in short supply

I’ll share the results later when the poll closes but if you look at the right of the page, you can click to vote too.

When you think about it, all water has been sewage at one point in time.  Everyone lives downstream of someone or something, even animals poo and pee in our rivers and dams.

Some major towns in Australia are taking their source water from rivers that are having treated sewage discharged upstream of them.

So, we are already drinking sewage of one type or another, so isn’t producing this proven, technically competent manner a method that should be incorporated into any sustainable water management policy?

Treated Sewage, Would You Drink It? (Part 1)

Photo by  Tomas Castel

Drought is a part of life in Australia.  Our great rivers, the Murray Darling System, the Murrumbidgee and others are often little more than sluggish brown streams.  Salt laden, polluted and full of nitrates from fertiliser run off, this is where much of Australia’s drinking water comes from.

The water management strategies employed by our politicians often seem to be aimed at giving history the opportunity to remember the politicians for the landmark projects they created rather than remembering them for developing effective and inclusive strategies that provide real results and benefits for the environment.

Desalination seems to be regarded by many as the panacea for all that ails our water systems while storm water harvesting and treating sewage to recycle as drinking water are often overlooked.

Treated sewage provides a convenient resource and here’s how it could get from the home back to our tap.

In large cities around the globe, sewage and waste-water is collected from homes and storm-water drains via a sewerage system and then it gets processed at a treatment plant.


At the first stage the sewage passes through a filter to remove large materials like tree limbs, garbage, plastics and large organic matter.  From there it passes to the primary sedimentation tank, where sludge settles to the bottom and lighter liquids like grease, oil and soap rise to the top. The surface is skimmed off while the sludge is pumped away to a separate treatment facility.

From there, it’s pumped to another tank where bacteria breaks down any remaining organic matter in the wastewater, oxygen is pumped into the fluid to encourage the bacterial activity. The next step is more filtering, microfiltration that removes suspended solids, protozoa, bacteria, and some viruses.

The last step is to disinfect the water, often by the addition of chlorine, hydrogen peroxide and other chemicals and by running it past high intensity ultraviolet lights.

Image via WikipediaFrom here it can be “shandied” into the water supply pipeline or other ways like a river, or pumped into the ground, where it is reintroduced into the below-ground water supply.

Years later, after natural filtration, the water is extracted as part the wider supply network.  It is all treated together as part of our domestic water supply.

 So, what’s the problem with this?  The treated water itself is often cleaner (purer) than the original source water before treatment. 


Almost everyone lives downstream of someone or something, so the raw product that's turned into our drinking water today isn't so pristine after all.

As reported in the Melbourne Age in 2008:
"The Victorian government is opposed to the drinking of recycled sewage, despite a study in 2006 finding it could be done in Melbourne at less financial and environmental cost than seawater desalination.
Despite the policy ban, many Victorian towns along the Murray River effectively drink recycled sewage already, by taking their drinking supplies from rivers that are boosted by the treated wastewater of towns upstream."


Maybe taking a long, hard and rational look at this technology isn't such a bad idea?

The technology exists and is at work in places like Orange County, California, so it’s not a technical issue that's stopping the wider adoption of this alternative, it’s all psychological and part 2 delves into this issue.

Modern Environmental Vandalism

Image via WikipediaIn the short time that Europeans have been coming to Australia, they have been unleashing a never ending series of feral animals on the native landscape.

Animals such as cane toads, foxes, rabbits; weeds such as salvation jane, thistle and blackberry have been introduced, all of which have significant environmental and financial impacts on the Australian landscape.

It seems that we cannot learn from the mistakes of the past

Feral deer in South Australia are an ever increasing problem that continues to have an impact on native flora and fauna.

Image via WikipediaDeer have been found in the Waite and Brown Hills Creek Reserves as well as the South East of SA.

Red and Fallow deer species are the most prevalent although 6 species of deer are found in lesser numbers.  Most of the deer are descended from animals that have escaped from commercial herds.

Biosecurity SA state:  "Deer in large numbers threaten environmental and agricultural values and public safety."

Deer pose a number of problems to the Australian native flora and fauna.  Deer graze or browse native vegetation and grasses and kill young trees through constant rubbing with their antlers, especially during the rut.

These deer also trample the mounds of the Malleefowl, a species listed as vulnerable.

Despite increasing education and the profile that environmental issues have in Australia, the lessons of the past regarding the impact that introduced species can have on the native habitat continue to be ignored.

Those who believe that deer are "cute and should be left alone" are perpetrating the worst kind of modern environmental vandalism.

Research for an article

HELP, I am doing some research for an article and here's your opportunity to help.

I've posted a pole on LinkedIn and there's a widget here for you to vote and have your say.

Thanks

An Orwellian Approach To Social Media

Politicians only know one of two ways to react to a situation, there is the tried and trusted knee jerk reaction or the equally time tested method where they simply bury their head in the sand.

In the Middle East and North Africa, China and many other countries around the world with poor human rights records, social media sites have suffered at the hands of regimes taking the sledgehammer approach to dissent and protest. Now it seems in the UK that the Government wants to follow suit and censor or shut down or limit access to social media and other types of messaging services.

Image via WikipediaThat the violence recently experienced in the UK was despicable and mindless is without question.  The issue now is: Do the Government of David Cameron and the Metropolitan Police really have the answers to the questions that are being asked of them now?

If the organisers were as sophisticated as the UK Government are telling us,  limiting access to any social media or messaging service is a waste of effort.  Users all over the world in countries with far more insidious control of their people have found ways to side step imitations imposed by Governments.  

Sidestepping the Cameron approach could simply be a matter of creating a new account, not something terribly difficult for the average 7 year old, let alone someone who has an agenda.

What is also being overlooked in this approach is that neither the social media sites or the messaging services are really broadcast services.  People interact with those they are following, or already within their network so the illusion of mass broadcasting of invitations to pillage the local shops are exactly that, illusions. 

Mind you, the UK Government is only treading the same path as authorities do in the US when they want to limit protests.  In San Francisco recently the Bay Area Rapid Transit system, better known as BART, shut down mobile phone towers to limit protests against after a police shooting.  In the article on NPR.ORG, it is reported that authorities limited the phone reception for 3 hours to control the protest, there is no suggestion in the article that the authorities thought that the protest would turn violent or endanger life in any way.

Playing shoot the messenger isn't going to work, especially when the same social media sites and messaging services are being used by volunteers to clean up after the violence.

Sun Causes Phone Problems

Image via Wikipedia

 If your mobile phone drops out over the next few days, for a change it may not be Telstra's fault. 

Three large explosions on the surface of the sun have seen US Government officials issue advisories warning of disruptions to satellites that provide telecommunication and GPS services.

Despite advances in protection systems, major electrical grids are also vulnerable to these events.

A solar flare becomes a problem for the Earth when the flare and associated coronal mass ejection are pointed in our direction.

The first of these storms passed the Earth on Thursday with little impact but the one passing now is stronger.  The effects of the third could be to amplify the effects of the second storm on the Earth’s magnetic field.

Scientists at the US Space Weather Prediction Centre predict the next peak in solar activity, known as a solar maximum, to occur in 2013.