Saturday, September 25, 2021

NEW YORK TIMES

CANADA LETTER

Alberta’s ‘Best Summer Ever’ Ends With an Overwhelmed Medical System

A surge of Covid-19 cases has forced the province to ask for military assistance in airlifting patients to hospitals across the country.


By Ian Austen
Sept. 24, 2021

Premier Jason Kenney was roundly criticized by public health experts in June when he declared victory over the coronavirus and made Alberta the first province to largely lift pandemic restrictions.

Jason Kenney, the premier of Alberta, in his office in Calgary
.Credit...Amber Bracken for The New York Times


“We finally have the upper hand on this virus and can safely open up our province,” Mr. Kenney said at a podium with a sign declaring the province was “open for summer.” Over at his United Conservative Party’s website, supporters could buy caps embroidered with the slogan: “Best Summer Ever, Alberta 2021.”

Last week, Mr. Kenney was back with a less triumphal message: the declaration of a public health emergency, while reimposing more restrictions for the second time this month, and appointing a new health minister.

As of Thursday, Alberta had 20,180 active Covid cases, nearly half of all cases in Canada, straining intensive care units at hospitals to the point that the provincial government has asked for military assistance to fly patients thousand of miles to be treated in other provinces. Since Mr. Kenney lifted restrictions on Canada Day, Covid has killed 308 people in Alberta.

“I know that we had all hoped this summer that we could put Covid behind us once and for all; that was certainly my hope,” Mr. Kenney said on Sept. 16. “It is now clear that we were wrong, and for that I apologize.”

Many members of Alberta’s medical community bluntly dismissed Mr. Kenney’s comments for coming, in their view, weeks too late to stem the crisis, and said that his new public health measures were far short of what was needed.

“We’re already at the point where our health care system has functionally collapsed,” Dr. Ilan Schwartz, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Alberta, told me on Friday. “Yet we have a society continuing as if nothing is awry.”

Those opposed to Covid-19-related public health measures protested this month at the Foothills Medical Center in Calgary.
Credit...Jeff Mcintosh/The Canadian Press, via Associated Press


Dr. Schwartz is among many in the province’s medical community who began raising the alarm during the summer, as the Delta variant combined with Alberta’s comparatively low vaccination rates prompted a rise in infections and hospital admissions. (With just 61.9 percent of Albertans fully vaccinated compared with the national rate of 69.7 percent, the province is second only to Saskatchewan for having the lowest rate of vaccine take-up.)

At the beginning of September, Alberta introduced some pandemic control measures. But Dr. Schwartz said that they were inadequate and often ineffective.

“As if an alcohol curfew of 10 p.m. could ward off the virus,” he said. Rather than keeping crowds from packing nightclubs, Dr. Schwartz added, the measure only meant that “people were just going out to party earlier.”

On the day of Mr. Kenney’s apology, his government announced a variety of renewed restrictions and rules, including those involving masks. But given the level of severity of the situation, Dr. Schwartz said that the new safety measures would not be nearly enough to prevent the health care system from being overwhelmed. Alberta, in his view, needed to introduce a “hard lockdown” where most things other than essential retail and services would be closed.

Sign up for the Canada Letter Newsletter Back stories and analysis from our Canadian correspondents, plus a handpicked selection of our recent Canada-related coverage. Get it sent to your inbox.

He particularly noted, with disapproval, the plans to allow N.H.L. games to take place in front of tens of thousands of fans in Calgary and Edmonton. While fans will need proof of vaccination or a recent negative test result to enter, several news outlets have reported that Alberta’s vaccine document, like Ontario’s, can be easily edited or faked using only minimal computer skills.

“We really have no option but to go into a hard lockdown, what we’re calling a firebreak,” he said. “Basically, we have a raging forest fire — Albertans are familiar with the imagery. We’re calling for removing some of the combustible elements, in this case people, out of the way.”

Instead, Mr. Kenney’s government has mostly promised to give more resources to hospitals. However, Dr. Schwartz said that such extra resources were impossible to provide because of shortages of trained medical staff.

He did not foresee Alberta’s situation improving until the government shut the province down.

“I never would have imagined that this could happen in Canada,” Dr. Schwartz said. “We’re at such a desperate point. It’s extremely demoralizing to health care workers. It’s terrifying to patients and to individuals who are chronically ill. That the government hasn’t implemented a meaningful hard lockdown at this point, while perhaps politically unpopular, it boggles my mind.”


Where We Left Off



Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, with his wife Sophie Grégoire and their children Ella-Grace and Xavier, on election night in Montreal.
Credit...Christinne Muschi/Reuters

In an election that somehow seemed both interminable and yet over in a flash, Canada now finds itself with a Liberal minority government in a Parliament that looks pretty much like the one that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had dissolved to allow a vote.

Our coverage included an analysis I wrote with Dan Bilefsky of how Canada got back to where it began. You can find The Times’s Election Day article here, and here’s our Election Day briefing.

For those of you who missed it, I offered four takeaways from the campaign in a special edition of this newsletter. And my political profile of Mr. Trudeau appeared shortly before Monday’s vote.


Trans Canada


Meng Wanzhou, the chief financial officer of Huawei, leaving her home in Vancouver on Friday.
Credit...Darryl Dyck/Canadian Press, via Associated Press


After more than 1,000 days, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, the two Canadians jailed by China in apparent retaliation for the arrest of Meng Wanzhou, the Chinese telecom executive, were on their way home Friday night after a day of developments. First Ms. Meng, the chief financial officer at Huawei, appeared virtually in an American court to settle a fraud case against her by admitting some wrongdoing. She then went to a court in Vancouver, where it was announced that the United States had dropped its extradition request related to those fraud charges, which had led to her arrest at that city’s airport in 2018. Ms. Meng left Vancouver for China at about the same time that Mr. Kovrig and Mr. Spavor were released by the Chinese authorities and boarded a flight for Canada.


Manohla Dargis, a New York Times film critic, wrote that after attending the Toronto International Film Festival, where screenings were held in largely empty cinemas because of the pandemic, “I was reminded that a film festival isn’t simply a series of back-to-back new movies. It’s also people, joined together, and ordinarily jammed together, as one under the cinematic groove.”



A native of Windsor, Ontario, Ian Austen was educated in Toronto, lives in Ottawa and has reported about Canada for The New York Times for the past 16 years. Follow him on Twitter at @ianrausten.

 

Burnaby Trans Mountain worker 'knocked unconscious' amid tree-sit protest: police

Two people were arrested on Friday
extraction best tmx trees
RCMP in Burnaby are using a lift bucket to reach Trans Mountain protesters.

Two people were arrested and one worker was injured Friday as Burnaby RCMP attempted to clear more protesters from a Trans Mountain site, said police.

The first demonstrator was arrested around 9:30 a.m. after trespassing into a fenced area on private property owned by BNSF Railway, in violation of a court ordered injunction stating they could not obstruct, impede, or otherwise prevent access to Trans Mountain work sites.

Around noon, Burnaby RCMP officers returned to the area, located west of North Road and south of Highway 1, responding to reports that a Trans Mountain worker had been injured after being struck on the head by a branch near an occupied tree-sit.


“The worker was knocked unconscious and has been taken to hospital for treatment of his injuries, including a possible concussion,” said police in a news release. “It appears the branch fell on the worker while the protester was repelling between tree-sits.”

RCMP officers trained in high-angle rescue were called to the area. The demonstrator from the tree-sit safely came down on his own around 3:20 p.m.

The demonstrator was arrested at the scene. The incident remains under investigation, police said.

Protesters have been occupied trees in this forested area along the Brunette River for more than a year as Trans Mountain looks to cut more than 1,300 trees.

Zain Haq, 20, who was arrested, said in a news release: “The future of life on this planet is at stake. We must put a moratorium on all new fossil fuel infrastructure … This twinned pipeline poses tremendous risk locally, and globally once the product is burned. The consequences of inaction are catastrophic. As a young person, I am motivated to do whatever I can to dampen the horrors of the not-so-distant future: mass starvation, breakdown of ecosystems, mass extinction, etc.”

Two arrested in separate incidents at Trans Mountain protest in Burnaby Friday

Trans Mountain worker struck by branch during tree-sit, sent to hospital with possible concussion

A protester climbs a tree at Lost Creek in Burnaby on Thursday, Aug. 12, 2021. (Maggie MacPherson/CBC)

Two demonstrators were arrested in Burnaby on Friday during separate incidents at a Trans Mountain work site, one of which sent a Trans Mountain worker to hospital. 

According to Burnaby RCMP, the first person was arrested at 9:30 a.m., after trespassing onto private property owned by BNSF Railway. This was in violation of a court-ordered injunction stating demonstrators could not obstruct or impede access to Trans Mountain work sites.

RCMP were called back to the area at noon, after receiving reports that a Trans Mountain worker had been struck on the head by a branch near an occupied tree-sit. The worker had been knocked unconscious and was taken to hospital to be treated for a possible concussion. 

Police say the branch fell on the worker while a protester was rapelling between tree-sits. 

Officers trained in high-angle rescue were called to the area, and the protester came down on his own at 3:20 p.m. 

The protester was then arrested. Police are still investigating. 

Protesters have been engaged in a tree-sit in a conservation area along the Brunette River since Aug. 3, 2020, with the goal of blocking construction on the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. The blockade remains as of today, and several nearby tree-sits have been established.

RCMP carry away elderly TMX protester in Burnaby


Elderly protester carried off

Another person was arrested Thursday as police continue to clear out people occupying trees in Burnaby to protest the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project.

The demonstrator had trespassed into a fenced area on private property owned by BNSF Railway, in violation of a court injunction stating they could not obstruct, impede, or otherwise prevent access to Trans Mountain work sites.

Video showed one person being carried away by police on Thursday.

“The demonstrator was given the opportunity to leave the area voluntarily, but chose not to,” said police. She was safely arrested just before 10 a.m.

“Burnaby RCMP would like to take this moment to remind those who are involved in ongoing demonstrations that police are an impartial party and are there to ensure the safety of everyone involved,” said a police news release.

Earlier in the week, a person occupying one of the trees in Burnaby was arrested. Police in tactical gear are using a lift bucket machine to reach protesters in the trees.

On Friday morning, the group Protect the Planet – Stop TMX said two people had “locked themselves down to the ground” at the tree-occupation site, located west of North Road and south of Highway 1 in Burnaby.

“This is a tactic also used at Fairy Creek, known as a soft block,” said a news release from the group, adding that they expect more people to be arrested today.

The aim is to prevent Trans Mountain workers from cutting the trees. The project will see more than 1,300 trees cut down in the area.

SFU Burnaby students to launch Trans Mountain protest march as arrests continue

People still occupying Burnaby trees
tree protest01 tmx
An RCMP officer lifted up to arrest a person occupying a Burnaby tree.

A group of SFU students and faculty have pledged to march from the Burnaby Mountain campus down the hill to protest the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project.

People are invited to gather at 4:30 p.m. at the UniverCity Town Square to hear speakers, followed by the march at 5 p.m. that will end up at the intersection of Gaglardi Way and University Drive.

As organizer and SFU student Hanieh Shakeri explained, “We are organizing this march to bring attention to the dangers of the TMX pipeline, and especially the unsafe situation that SFU students have been placed in by the presence of the tank farm so close to our campus. We hope that SFU will show their commitment to student safety by putting pressure on the government to halt the TMX pipeline project.”

The march comes as at least two people have been arrested this week in Burnaby for protests at the site where more than 1,300 trees are to be cut down to make way for the pipeline.

CAIR & ADL  AGREE
Fresh calls for Fox News to fire Tucker Carlson over ‘replacement theory’

Host dismisses Anti-Defamation League after organization urges network to drop him
'FUCK THEM'

Tucker Carlson in Esztergom, Hungary, in August. 
Photograph: Janos Kummer/Getty Images

Martin Pengelly
THE GUARDIAN
Sat 25 Sep 2021 14.42 BST

After the Anti-Defamation League renewed its call for Tucker Carlson to be fired from Fox News for voicing the racist “great replacement” theory about immigration, the primetime host had a pithy response: “Fuck them.”

Carlson was speaking to the former Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly on Sirius XM. He made the comments in question on his show on Wednesday, which averages more than 3 million viewers a night.

Claiming the Biden administration was trying “to change the racial mix of the country”, Carlson said: “In political terms, this policy is called ‘the great replacement’, the replacement of legacy Americans with more obedient people from far-away countries.

“They brag about it all the time, but if you dare to say it’s happening they will scream at you with maximum hysteria.”

The “great replacement theory” originated on the far right. Perpetrators of recent mass shootings have cited iterations of the theory in “manifestos” attempting to justify their actions.

Carlson raised the theory in April, claiming it was not racist but a matter of hardball politics. The ADL chief executive, Jonathan Greenblatt, called for Carlson to be fired.

Lachlan Murdoch, chief executive of the Fox Corporation, wrote back: “Mr Carlson decried and rejected replacement theory. As Mr Carlson himself stated … ‘White replacement theory? No, no, this is a voting rights question.’”

This week, Greenblatt repeated his call.

“For Tucker Carlson to spread the toxic, antisemitic and xenophobic ‘great replacement theory’ is a repugnant and dangerous abuse of his platform.

“If it somehow wasn’t clear enough before to the executives at Fox News that Carlson was openly embracing white nationalist talking points, let last night’s episode be case and point.”

The Council on American Islamic Relations also said Carlson should be fired.

Kelly asked Carlson how he felt when “sure enough the ADL comes after you”.

“The ADL?” Carlson said, laughing. “Fuck them.”

The ADL, he said, “was a noble organisation that had a very specific goal, which was to fight antisemitism, and that’s a virtuous goal. They were pretty successful over the years. Now it’s operated by a guy who’s just an apparatchik of the Democratic party.

“It’s very corrosive for someone to take the residual moral weight of an organisation that he inherited and use it for party.

“So the great replacement theory is, in fact, not a theory. It’s something that the Democrats brag about constantly, up to and including the president.

“And in one sentence, it’s this: ‘Rather than convince the current population that our policies are working and they should vote for us as a result, we can’t be bothered to do that. We’re instead going to change the composition of the population and bring in people who will vote for us.’ So there isn’t actually inherently a racial component to it, and it’s nothing to do with antisemitism.”

Kelly also played a clip of Joe Biden speaking in 2015, which Carlson used on Wednesday.

In the clip, the then vice-president says: “An unrelenting stream of immigration, non-stop, non-stop. Folks like me who were Caucasian, of European descent for the first time in 2017 will be in an absolute minority in the United States of America, absolute minority. Fewer than 50% of the people in America from then and on will be White European stock. That’s not a bad thing. That’s as a source of our strength.”


Fox News host Tucker Carlson tells interviewer: ‘I lie’


On Wednesday, Carlson said: “An unrelenting stream of immigration. But why? Well, Joe Biden just said it, to change the racial mix of the country … to reduce the political power of people whose ancestors lived here, and dramatically increase the proportion of Americans newly arrived from the Third World … This is the language of eugenics, it’s horrifying.”

Analysts have shown that the clip is edited misleadingly.

As the Washington Post pointed out, Biden made the remarks as part of “about six minutes of commentary, beginning with the fact that the city of Boston came together as a community after the bombing during the Boston marathon.

“‘I’m not suggesting … that I think America has all the answers here,’ Biden said. ‘We just have a lot more expe

 NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETLY DIFFERENT

Frank Zappa's Surrealistic Documentary and Soundtrack 200 Motels Gets Multi-Format 50th Anniversary Treatment

Here's the press release:
Los Angeles – September 24, 2021 – Released in October 1971, Frank Zappa’s “200 Motels” was a miraculous feat, a cinematic collision of the venerated musician and composer’s kaleidoscopic musical and visual worlds that brought together Zappa and his band, The Mothers, Ringo Starr as Zappa – as “a large dwarf” – Keith Moon as a perverted nun, Pamela Des Barres in her acting debut, noted thespian Theodore Bikel, the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, and an incredible assortment of characters (both on screen and off) for a “surrealistic documentary” about the bizarre life of a touring musician. A heady, psychedelic stew of low and high brow art forms, the film, written by Zappa and co-directed by him and Tony Palmer, mixed together irreverent comedic skits, madcap satire, eye-popping animation and virtuosic on-screen musical performances from both The Mothers and the RPO for a fascinating and free-wheeling multimedia extravaganza. Shot in just 10 days with a budget of around $650,000 from distributor United Artists, “200 Motels” was one of the first movies to be filmed entirely on videotape and Zappa and crew pushed the envelope of the burgeoning new medium’s possibilities, mostly notably through its use of spectacular – and at the time – state-of-the-art visual effects. Described by Zappa as “at once a reportage of real events and an extrapolation of them… other elements include ‘conceptual by-products’ of the extrapolated ‘real event’ … In some ways the contents of the film are autobiographical,” “200 Motels” was hailed by the Los Angeles Times as a “a stunning achievement” with “just the right touch of insanity,” and the “Zaniest piece of filmusical fantasy-comedy since The Beatles' ‘A Hard Day's Night’” by Daily Variety.

The music, and its corresponding soundtrack, was equally diverse, a wild pastiche of avant garde rock and orchestral compositions interspersed with dialog from the film. Up until that time, compositions like the finale piece, “Strictly Genteel,” were some of the most ambitious material ever written and recorded by Zappa. The band in the film and on the soundtrack consisted of Frank Zappa (guitar & bass), Mark Volman (vocals & special material), Howard Kaylan (vocals & special material), Ian Underwood (keyboards & winds), Aynsley Dunbar (drums), George Duke (keyboards & trombone), Martin Lickert (bass), Jimmy Carl Black (vocals), and Ruth Underwood (orchestra drum set), not to mention the aforementioned Royal Philharmonic Orchestra. In true Zappa fashion as he wrote in the album’s original liner notes, “This music is not in the same order as in the movie. Some of this music is in the movie. Some of this music is not in the movie. Some of the music that’s in the movie is not in the album. Some of the music that was written for the movie is not in the movie or the album. All of this music was written for the movie, over a period of 4 years. Most of it (60%) was written in motels while touring.”

In celebration of “200 Motels” golden anniversary, Zappa Records, UMe and MGM have assembled a definitive Super Deluxe six-disc box set of the beloved, yet hard to find, soundtrack for release on November 19. Fully authorized by the Zappa Trust and produced by Ahmet Zappa and Zappa Vaultmeister Joe Travers, the monstrous 200 Motels 50th Anniversary Edition brings together the original soundtrack, newly remastered by Bernie Grundman at Bernie Grundman Mastering, along with a staggering amount of unreleased and rare material unearthed from FZ’s Vault, including original demos, studio outtakes, work mixes, interviews and movie ads, along with newly discovered dialog reels, revealing an early audio edit of the film. Also included is a wealth of never-before-heard audio documentary material surrounding the project.

Discs 1 and 2 feature the remastered soundtrack with the second half of the second disc consisting of demos and demo outtakes; two of the many highlights from these sessions include unreleased alt mixes and alt takes of the Chunga’s Revenge tunes, “Road Ladies” and “Tell Me You Love Me.” Discs 3 and 4 contain the “Dialog Protection Reels,” which reveal an early version of the movie, while Disc 5 and 6 present unreleased outtakes, alternates and historical nuggets sequenced in the order of the original shooting script, the way Zappa originally envisioned before he ran into time and budget constraints. These illuminating discs reveal Zappa’s original intent for the film for the first time.

The six-disc set will be housed in a 64-page hardcover book in a handsome 12” x 12” slipcase. The packaging replicates the original booklet updated with revealing new liner notes from Pamela Des Barres, Ruth Underwood and Joe Travers, as well as Patrick Pending’s essay from the 1997 reissue, and is chock full of motion picture artwork, stills and images, from the film and its making, many which have never been seen before. This must-have collector’s release will also include a custom “200 Motels” keychain and Do-No-Disturb motel door hanger and a full-size replica of the original movie poster. Years in the making, all the audio was meticulously identified and transferred over several years as Travers dug through the Vault to create a new high resolution 96K/24B digital patchwork stereo master from the original analog tapes. The Vault material was mastered by John Polito in 2021.

The remastered 200 Motels soundtrack will also be reissued on vinyl as a 2LP pressed on 180-gram black vinyl and also as a limited edition red vinyl pressing on 180-gram vinyl, which will only be available exclusively through Zappa.com,uDiscoverMusic.com or SoundofVinyl.com. Both will be pressed by Optimal Media in Germany and be the first time the album has been available on vinyl in decades. The soundtrack will also be released on 2CD and all formats will include a smaller version of the movie poster. Additionally, the entire Super Deluxe Edition box set will be available digitally for streaming and download, marking the soundtrack’s digital debut, in both standard and hi-res audio. Pre-order for all configurations is available now.


A Hunter-Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century review – self-help laced with pseudoscience


Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein attempt to show how human nature is at odds with modern society, but their science, and style, grates


Heying and Weinstein provide evolutionary self-help advice to address the mismatch between stone-age brains and high-tech society.
 Photograph: Stefan Wermuth/Reuters


Stuart Ritchie
THE GUARDIAN
Fri 24 Sep 2021 
Imagine discovering a fence in the middle of a desert. Not immediately seeing its purpose, you might think: “Let’s get rid of this useless fence!” But are you sure about that? Maybe you’re at the edge of a field of angry wildebeest, and by removing the fence you’ll leave yourself vulnerable to be crushed, Mufasa-style, in a stampede. Better to first find out why the fence is there before attempting to tear it down.

So goes the argument made by GK Chesterton in 1929: you should try to understand things before changing them. The evolutionary biologists Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein – whom some readers might remember from 2017, when they resigned from Evergreen College in Washington State after a dramatic culture-war flareup – have written a book that takes Chesterton’s fence as its central metaphor. By disregarding the facts of evolved human nature, they argue, the modern world in all its novelty has destroyed the proverbial fence, leaving us unhealthy, miserable and heading for societal collapse.

We eat the wrong food. We prescribe too many drugs. We raise and educate our children badly. Heying and Weinstein provide evolutionary self-help advice to address the mismatch between stone-age brains and hi-tech society. More respect for the evolved aspects of humanity will, apparently, cure what ails us.

Let’s accept for the sake of argument that modern society really is terribly bad for us (although, given vast increases in life expectancy, we shouldn’t). How do we know which parts of human nature are the ones we should take better account of? Heying and Weinstein’s answer is essentially everything. If it is something complex, costly (in terms of energy or materials), and has been around for a long time in evolutionary or cultural history, it’s probably an adaptation – there for a reason, and not a mere accident.

This does readers a disservice. The debate over “adaptationism” in biology is long-running, and is not going to be solved by glib reasoning like this. Heying and Weinstein lunge clumsily at evolution’s Gordian knot, fail even to nick it with their blade, yet still smugly tell their audience that they have sliced it right in half.

Still, if everything is an adaptation, there is a lot of advice to give. Some of it – offered in bullet points closing each chapter – is boilerplate (get more exercise; get more sleep); some is oddly specific (go barefoot more often); some is plain weird (don’t let markets get involved in music or comedy). Little of it appears to be based on actual research; the science is really, as the kids these days say, just a vibe.

Ancient Native American rock carvings depict deers being hunted. 
Photograph: Hal Beral/Getty Images

Not that the authors do much better when they engage with studies. They make alarming pronouncements based on flimsy data, such as when they say that water fluoridation is “neurotoxic” to children based on one reference to a “pilot study”. They lazily repeat false information from other pop-science books, such as the “fact” that all known species sleep (some, including certain amphibians, don’t!). The final chapter, in which they embrace the bonkers “degrowth” movement, contains what might be the single stupidest paragraph on economics ever written (claiming, bizarrely, that the invention of more efficient versions of products such as fridges would bring the economy to its knees).

Above all, Heying and Weinstein are really annoying. Their seen-it-all, know-it-all attitude is grating from around page five, and becomes increasingly irksome as they pontificate their way through each chapter. If only you knew as much about evolution as they do, you would know how to organise society. You would know to “steer clear” of genetically modified food (the millions of lives saved by such food apparently don’t warrant a mention). You’d know not to have casual sex. You’d know not to look at your smartphone so much. And so on.

And they haven’t merely solved the central questions of biology. They are also, apparently, the best teachers imaginable. Without embarrassment, they quote a student describing their classroom as “an ancestral mode for which I was primed, but didn’t even know existed”. Their towering self-regard gives them the false belief that all their arguments – including the book’s premise, which is just a repackaging of 18th-century Burkean conservatism with a faux-Darwinian paint job – are staggeringly innovative.

Where has all this evolutionary reasoning, this respect for Chesterton’s fences, led Heying and Weinstein? In the past months they have distinguished themselves as some of the most credulous proponents of Covid pseudoscience. Not only has Weinstein spread dangerous misinformation about mRNA vaccine safety, but both authors have enthusiastically joined the movement of internet cranks obsessing about the drug ivermectin and its “near-perfect” (Weinstein’s words) properties in preventing coronavirus infection (in reality, on ivermectin the jury is very much still out).

These Covid positions, along with Heying and Weinstein’s advocacy of the still-unproven lab-leak hypothesis, gel nicely with the “don’t-play-God”, “mind-the-unforeseen-consequences”, “stick-to-the-traditional” worldview that the book promotes. But they are also that worldview’s best refutation. If respecting those metaphorical fences could get people killed during a pandemic, maybe our instinct to smash them down was right after all.

Stuart Ritchie’s Science Fictions: Exposing Fraud, Bias, Negligence and Hype in Science is out in paperback (Bodley Head). A Hunter-Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century by Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein is published by Swift.


Africa is not a monoculture, we reject the plan to make it one

Efforts to impose industrial agriculture on African countries threaten the sustainability of African food production.



Million Belay
General Coordinator of AFSA
22 Sep 2021

Farmer Nzyava, 49, works on her land in Katwa, near Butembo, in the Democratic Republic of Congo on October 5, 2019 [File: Reuters/Zohra Bensemra]

Organisers of this year’s African Green Revolution Forum claim the annual gathering that ended on September 10 provided a “single coordinated African voice” in advance of the upcoming United Nations Food Systems Summit. That voice sings the praises of capital-intensive technological innovation, with the host Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) playing conductor and trying to keep donors, governments, companies and UN agencies singing the same tune.

A very different choir, featuring a diverse range of voices, sang a very different song outside the virtual halls of the Forum. The Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA), representing some 200 million small-scale food producers in its continent-wide network, directly challenged AGRA’s claim to represent Africa.

Millions of African farmers, fisherfolk, Indigenous peoples, pastoralists, women’s networks, youth networks, consumer organisations, faith-based institutions, and other civil society organisations, gathered under the leadership of AFSA, sent a letter to AGRA donors on September 7 signed by 160 international organisations demanding an end to funding for failing Green Revolution projects.

We have spoken out about what we want from agriculture and life: food that is both healthful and nourishing and produced in a way that is not harmful to the environment and is culturally suitable.

In the West, everyone has a solution for Africa.

Philanthrocapitalists like Bill Gates, Western governments, aid organisations, embassies, colleges, corporations and certain members of our governments are pushing industrial agriculture on us. They are spending billions to sway governments and turn Africa into a dump site for agrochemicals, genetically modified organisms and outdated technology.

They propose a Green Revolution and point to India as an example of success. Yet the truth is that India’s Green Revolution was never the raging triumph that its proponents claimed, as ongoing farmer protests demonstrate. In India, the Green Revolution has primarily benefitted wealthy farmers, put millions of farmers into debt, degraded their environment, affected their health, and eroded their local seed production and culture. The Green Revolution there has been a colossal disaster.

The importation of this failing and destructive approach to food, agriculture and the environment into Africa must be challenged. And it has been challenged.

A wide range of African organisations has come together to demand change. In June the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) sent letters to AGRA donors asking for evidence of AGRA’s effectiveness in raising yields, incomes and food security. We received few responses and no evidence. Faith leaders also wrote to the Gates Foundation and got neither an acknowledgement nor a response.

There is a massive push under way, using the African Union Commission (AUC) in collaboration with AGRA and international donors, to modify the laws and regulations governing our seeds. The groundwork is being laid for corporate-led agriculture to thrive. This will breed dependency, deteriorate our health and the environment, undermine our culture and subjugate us to the will of a few.

We have had enough. Our struggle against the attempts to impose on us industrial agriculture will continue because we believe agroecology is a realistic strategy for improving our nutrition, increasing production, enhancing biodiversity, raising resilience and boosting farmer income.

The West has made very little investment in agroecology in Africa because the goal is to take Africa down the path of industrial agriculture. This must end.

As our open letter to AGRA donors notes, it is urgent to change course and turn to a development model based on truly sustainable practices, equity and justice.

I recently declined an invitation to speak at AGRA’s Green Revolution Forum. This is why:

We at AFSA disagree with the Green Revolution’s approach on a basic level. The strategy has indebted our farmers, ruined our environment, harmed our health and undermined our seeds and culture.

We object to the flurry of initiatives to amend our seed laws, biosafety standards, and institutionalise fertiliser rules and regulations that seek to entrench Africa’s overreliance on corporate agriculture.

That is why the diverse constituencies represented by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa are raising their voices outside the Green Revolution Forum. Africa is not a monoculture and we do not want it to become one.

Africa does not speak with a single voice, certainly not that of the Green Revolution Forum. Its diversity of voices is as rich as the diversity of the continent’s landscapes, cultures and food traditions. Those voices want to sing, not in monotones but in harmony, with one another, with nature, and with government leaders and donors who value that diversity and support it.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.


Million Belay
General Coordinator of AFSA
Dr Million Belay is the General Coordinator of the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA).

Bitcoin miners align with fossil fuel firms, alarming environmentalists

“When people don’t see pollution, they don’t think it’s there,” one expert said.

Bitcoin mining has brought money to fossil fuel plants that previously were struggling.
Chelsea Stahl / NBC News; Getty Images

Sept. 25, 2021
By Olivia Solon

Four years ago, the Scrubgrass power plant in Venango County, Pennsylvania, was on the brink of financial ruin as energy customers preferred to buy cheap natural gas or renewables. Then Scrubgrass pivoted to Bitcoin.

Today, through a holding company based in Kennerdell, Pennsylvania, called Stronghold Digital Mining that bought the plant, Scrubgrass burns enough coal waste to power about 1,800 cryptocurrency mining computers. These computers, known as miners, are packed into shipping containers next to the power plant, the company stated in documents filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ahead of its initial public offering. Coal waste is a byproduct from decades of mining in the region, left behind in enormous black piles. Stronghold estimated that it’s currently burning about 600,000 tons of it per year at Scrubgrass.

According to the SEC filings, Stronghold plans to operate 57,000 miners by the end of 2022 — an expansion that requires buying up two additional coal waste power plants in the region.

What happened at Scrubgrass highlights a growing trend within the crypto world that alarms some environmentalists. Bitcoin mining is breathing new life into America’s aging fossil fuel power plants, creating a demand environmentalists say discourages investment in renewable energy sources at a time when shifting away from carbon-emitting sources of energy is essential.

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies use blockchain technology, essentially a shared database of transactions, where entries must be confirmed and encrypted. The network is secured by “miners” who use powerful computers to compete in an enormous guessing game that ultimately verifies the transactions. If a computer “wins” the game, it’s rewarded with a newly created bitcoin, currently worth about $40,000. The process consumes a lot of electricity, and the computers generate a lot of heat, which means they require industrial cooling systems that need even more energy.

Because of this, the Bitcoin network currently consumes more electricity than many small countries, including the Philippines, according to the Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index.

“Bitcoin mining is essentially waste by design,” said Alex de Vries, a Dutch economist, researcher and founder of Digiconomist, a site that tracks the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies. “It’s a system where participants are forced to waste resources to provide some level of security on the network. The more value bitcoin has, the more money it’s worth, the more we spend on resources.”

The trend has accelerated in recent months after the Chinese government cracked down on bitcoin mining, which until May was home to about two-thirds of global bitcoin mining capacity, according to research firm Rystad Energy. On Friday, China went so far to announce that all cryptocurrency transactions were illegal, which delivered another blow to the industry. But the mining crackdown already led to an influx of bitcoin mining operations into the United States, with several states, including Texas and Kentucky, welcoming them with open arms, cheap electricity and tax incentives.

“These miners don’t just need cheap energy, but a stable source of power because their machines need to run 24/7, and fossil fuel sources are best suited for it,” de Vries said. “Miners are reviving gas plants and idle coal mines in places like New York and Montana.”

Stronghold officials declined to comment because the company is currently in an SEC-mandated quiet period ahead of its initial public offering. But in a recent filing, it described its operations as “environmentally-beneficial,” pointing to Pennsylvania's classification of waste coal power generation as a “Tier II alternative energy source.” This classification allows Stronghold to benefit from state subsidies.

Waste coal piles are an environmental hazard filled with contaminants that leach into waterways, killing fish and other wildlife, and they sometimes spontaneously catch fire, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Burning it as fuel in a power plant like Scrubgrass helps clean up the waste piles, but it emits carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as well as other dangerous greenhouse gases.

“Simply put, we employ 21st century crypto mining techniques to remediate the impacts of 19th and 20th century coal mining in some of the most environmentally neglected regions of the United States,” the company stated in the filing.

Stronghold


According to public filings, Stronghold works closely with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection to prioritize higher-risk coal waste piles, including those already burning or contaminating waterways, to burn as fuel for its power plants, removing harmful particulates that would be released into the atmosphere from piles that ignite spontaneously.

Rob Altenburg, senior director for energy and climate at PennFuture, a nonprofit organization focused on clean energy, said he believes the state is taking the wrong approach to handling the enormous piles of waste coal and that burning it in power plants just makes a visible problem invisible.

“When it burns, they don’t see big towers of black soot,” he said. “And when people don’t see pollution, they don’t think it’s there.”

Jamar Thrasher, a spokesperson for the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection said that the waste piles “continue to pollute our land, streams and air even while they sit there” and that “currently one of the most effective ways to remediate these piles is to consume them using the best available technology present at these plants like Scrubgrass to create electricity.” He added that “unfortunately, like other forms of electric generation using coal, natural gas and oil, this does result in emission of air pollutants which must be balanced against the environmental benefits provided by this form of generation.”

Altenburg and other air quality advocates prefer alternative approaches to remediation, including planting sea grass on top of waste piles to secure the surface and mitigate leaching problems or moving the waste coal into a lined landfill that prevents any leaching into waterways — a move the coal refuse lobby ARIPPA estimated would cost about $30 per ton.

Altenburg said he believes if the state diverted generous subsidies being given to the coal waste plants and considered the social cost of carbon emissions, it could also pay for remediation. But that would be politically unpopular.

“It’s much easier for our Legislature to pass a tax cut for a business than a bill spending money on environmental cleanup, even if the latter is more cost effective,” he said.

This year, the Pennsylvania Environmental Council recommended that the state’s alternative energy standards, which currently permit subsidies to waste coal plants, be reformed to phase out fossil fuel energy sources like waste coal plants unless they use carbon capture technology.
Chinese migration


Since China kicked bitcoin miners out in the spring, the proportion of bitcoin being mined using renewable energy sources has fallen as miners have migrated to countries with more fossil fuel-reliant energy grids, said Pete Howson, bitcoin expert and senior lecturer in international development at Northumbria University in the United Kingdom.

Many miners turned to China’s neighbors, including Kazakhstan and Abkhazia, recognized by most countries as part of Georgia, both of which have energy grids powered almost entirely by fossil fuels.

Others sought larger, more stable energy markets.

“A lot ended up in North America because there was enough cheapish power, and they could do deals with fossil fuel companies,” said cryptocurrency expert David Gerard.

Until the crackdown, bitcoin mining company Poolin did the vast majority of its mining in China, using mostly fossil fuels in Inner Mongolia and hydroelectric power in Sichuan.

The day after China announced the ban, Poolin Vice President Alejandro De La Torre headed to Texas.

“A very important factor for mining is the cost of electricity, and in Texas it’s very cheap. There’s a lot of oil, as well as wind power and solar,” he said. “There’s also a friendly political environment for bitcoin mining.”

In June, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott tweeted his excitement that Texas would be the next “crypto leader” as cryptocurrency kiosks rolled out in grocery stores.

Cryptocurrency advocates in Houston host a monthly Bitcoin meetup, which in August saw about 200 representatives from oil and gas companies and bitcoin mining companies gather to discuss energy trading,CNBC reported.

De La Torre, who attended the meetup, said Poolin is particularly drawn to using natural gas, a byproduct of the oil industry, that is otherwise being burnt off in flares.

“The narrative is that bitcoin mining is destroying the Earth,” he said. “But we can set up a machine that captures flared gas and runs it through a generator to make electricity. It takes the pollutant away from the atmosphere to create power used for mining.”
Endless expansion


While Poolin has moved its headquarters from Hong Kong to Austin, Texas, its employees have been flying across the other states to see whether they can find cheap energy deals or incentives for setting up operations.

“Kentucky has very attractive incentives,” he said. “That’s where all the coal power plants were located, and many have shut down. This means there’s a lot of electrical infrastructure that’s not being used.”

In late March, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear signed a pair of bills offering tax breaks to cryptocurrency miners who set up shop in the state.

Signs of this type of alignment are happening across the United States.


In New York, a former coal power plant on the shores of Seneca Lake converted to natural gas and has started bitcoin mining. Greenidge Generation, the company behind the power plant, on its website described its mining operation as “more than twice as efficient” as the global standard and “100% carbon neutral” through offsets. However, local residents said the power plant is polluting the air and heating the lake, as previously reported by NBC News. A full thermal study won’t be produced until 2023.

The CEO of Greenidge told NBC News in July that the lakeshore facility was operating within its federal and state environmental permits and had created 31 jobs.

In Montana, near the border with North Dakota, a Colorado startup called Crusoe Energy Systems is using natural gas, a byproduct of oil production, as a fuel to generate electricity for bitcoin miners in on-site storage containers. The gas Crusoe is using, bought from the oil field’s owner, Kraken Oil & Gas, would otherwise be burnt off in flares, emitting CO2 and other pollutants. Selling the gas to crypto miners is a win-win for miners and energy companies, proponents say. The process still generates CO2, but it also creates something of value.

De Vries views the process — which is being replicated around the world, including by Gazprom in Siberia — differently.

“Turning a byproduct of fossil fuel extraction profitable can extend the longevity of the power source, potentially making it operate longer than it otherwise would,” he said.

Howson agreed.

“Instead of building renewable infrastructure to power clean energy,” he said, “bitcoin mining is creating an incentive for fossil fuel power plants to become more profitable and continue doing what they are doing.”


Olivia Solon is a senior reporter on the tech investigations team for NBC News.
FALSE EQUIVALENCY FISSON = FUSION
Will We Accept Nuclear Fusion When It Comes?

James E. HanleySeptember 24, 2021




In the past two months, researchers have made two significant breakthroughs towards making nuclear fusion technologically and commercially viable. In California, scientists at the National Ignition Center hit a hydrogen capsule with laser beams, creating about ten quadrillion watts of energy, although for only 100 trillionths of a second. And in Massachusetts, MIT scientists started up a new superconducting electromagnet, necessary to contain nuclear plasma for fusion. While their previous magnet used 200 million watts of energy, this one used only about 30 watts. That’s less energy than your laptop uses.

But will the American public accept fusion energy when it becomes viable? The public antipathy towards nuclear power is so great that as utilities shut down aging nuclear power plants, they do not replace them. Four years ago, South Carolina gave up on longstanding plans to build the V. C. Sumner nuclear plant. Two units scheduled to begin operating this November at the Vogtle power plant in Georgia are the first new nuclear energy units built in the last thirty years.

The U.S. produces about four trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity each year, and demand continues to grow. Almost 800 billion kilowatt-hours, 19% of the total, came from nuclear energy. As existing plants shut down, we need to replace this energy production. Nuclear is the best alternative available for our long-term energy needs. It is reliable, controllable on-demand, and produces no CO2.

Generation IV nuclear plants also promise to be walk-away safe, running down instead of running out of control if left unattended. Designed as small modular reactors, they can be placed in underground containment units, further enhancing their safety and reducing nuclear’s cost. An additional advantage is that they will not produce plutonium as a byproduct, so they cannot produce nuclear weapons materials as many existing plants do. (If Iran focused on Generation IV technology using thorium, they could alleviate our concerns about their real intentions.) And yet, public opposition to nuclear power is so strong that few people understand these advantages, and no American utility is willing to undertake the political risk of experimenting with these new models.

Fusion energy, made by fusing light-weight hydrogen atoms instead of splitting heavier elements, would make even Generation IV technology obsolete. It is the holy grail of a safe, non-polluting, reliable, and almost limitless energy source. Fusion reactors will require the continuous addition of fuel to keep up the reaction, so a runaway reaction cannot occur. In addition, the waste product is not highly radioactive, but is simply helium. Therefore, like Generation IV reactors, they also cannot be used to produce material for nuclear weapons.

But only 29% of Americans have a favorable view of nuclear energy, with almost half having an unfavorable view. And only 16% think we should continue to build new nuclear reactors. And despite nuclear power having no carbon footprint from energy production, progressives did not include it as part of their green new deal.


Nuclear power has been more environmentally friendly than most people realize. Most environmental nuclear contamination in the United States has resulted from weapons production, particularly at the Hanford Site along the Columbia River in Washington, the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, and the recently cleaned up Rocky Flats plant in Colorado. Compared to the environmental damage from coal mining and coal ash waste, nuclear energy production is nearly pristine. Fusion energy will be even more so.

Opposition to nuclear power has been a staple of the environmental movement for decades, and NIMBYism has created persistent challenges to siting power plants. A significant portion of the enormous cost of nuclear power plants has come from fighting the legal battles associated with siting and approval. So environmentalists are gaslighting us when they cite the cost of nuclear power as a reason to oppose it.

It is true, though, that nuclear power is not currently one of the least expensive energy sources. Even Generation IV technologies, although more cost-effective, will not make it the cheapest. At present, the market favors natural gas as having the best combination of cost and reliability. Some renewables are less costly, but they are limited in potential and reliability unless we add storage capacity for times when they are unavailable. Advocates rarely factor in this cost, but an honest accounting must.

Fusion has the potential to cost only one-fourth the current price of nuclear energy, half the cost of natural gas, and be cheaper than onshore wind. All this is in addition to its safety, reliability, and lack of pollution. And by using the most abundant element on earth, hydrogen, it provides a limitless future.

The only question is whether our politics allows us to accept this good fortune.


James E. Hanley is an independent non-partisan scholar. He earned his Ph.D. in Political Science at the University of Oregon, followed by a post-doctoral fellowship under 2009 Economics Nobel Prize winner Elinor Ostrom, and twenty years of teaching Political Science and Economics at the collegiate level.

WHENEVER SOMEONE CLAIMS TO BE NON PARTISAN OR A POLITICAL THEY ARE A CONSERVATIVE IN DISGUISE