By admin | February 3, 2010
Submitted by PlasticLess.com Blog
I am somewhat romantic. Really, I am. I just don’t tend to equate romanticism with gift giving. Valentine’s Day will always have an element of meh for me thanks to the conspiracy between card manufacturers and elementary school teachers. I know that I am a bit of an exception in this regard, so I am offering this gift suggestion for the people that want to give a heart-shaped consumer good to their sweetie.
The folks at Wrapsacks have a Valentine’s package featured on their site that includes 2 reusable shopping totes that zip up into a heart-shaped pouch as well as 1 medium fabric gift bag. I have been using their shopping totes for the last 3 months and they are awesome. They have handles that are long enough to put over your shoulder but they are sized so that they aren’t too close to the ground if you choose to hold them in your hand. The handle material goes all the way down the sides of the bag so they aren’t the weakest part of the bag. I’ve had cheaper bags lose their handles after a few months of carrying stuff.
*Wrapsacks provided me with free bags for the purposes of review. I don’t typically ask for or receive review products because of my remote location.
By admin | February 3, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
“Steve Shoap has invented a rapidly deployable system to move large quantities of water over long distances. The invention can rapidly bring water, electric power, and communications to areas that have lost them. Haiti shows how an earthquake can destroy the water supply to a large population. If you know anyone at FEMA or Homeland Security, please forward this post to them. The invention can also be used to fight wildfires.
He has also invented a new type of irrigation system. The idea is to embed the wire pair from a two-wire irrigation system into PVC pipe .When the pipe is installed, the control system is installed with it. No additional wires need to be trenched. The wires pair also supplies power to the valves by trickle charging rechargeable batteries at the valves. His proposed system has the potential to reduce the material, installation, and maintenance costs of advanced irrigation systems.
Steve believes that changing rainfall patterns and will force more farmers to use irrigation. Many regions are suffering droughts and then occasional deluges. Hopefully, the water from deluges can be stored and then later used for irrigating crops.”
You thoughts? Comments?
By admin | February 3, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
During my class at Berkeley, I gave my students “the hardest assignment in the world,” i.e.,
Please explain how a leader can promote an environmental program that will benefit the average citizen — but not special interest groups — and still get re-elected.
Although I provided numerous clarifications to my students, this assignment is pretty straightforward: solve a collective action problem.
Collective action problems are rife in the water sector, and — you will see — many other areas of social and political action. They arise from two factors. First, there is the misalignment of costs and benefits. A collective good gives benefits to everyone (as a “public good” like a radio station or “common pool good” like a community reservoir), and it’s hard to exclude those people from enjoying it. Because of this non-exclusionary characteristic, it’s hard to force those who benefit from the good to pay for its provision. Thus, we may see (and do see) that people “free ride,” enjoying the benefits but avoiding the costs. Because of this free riding, the good may not be provided at all, creating our collective action problem.
While people commonly assume that collective goods will only be provided when the government taxes everyone and uses those funds to create them, there are numerous examples of social and private provision of these goods. (Religion often plays a part in motivating people.)
Right. So that’s the context for the assignment I gave my students. Although many of them thought it unfair that I ask them to give a solution to a collective action problem (in one page, no less!), several of them gave interesting suggestions. These are what I wanted when I gave the assignment: some new thoughts from people didn’t know how hard their assignment was supposed to be!
Before I get to those, note this further wrinkle: Their brief was directed at a politician who was going to face re-election, and — it is assumed — an opponent who would be able to draw support from whatever special interests were free-riding on the currently provided collective good or would suffer if that good (e.g., a clean environment) were to be provided.
And here are the first two ideas:
Andrew C. introduces an interesting idea to promote open spaces. Developers want to build houses, but home-owners (and enviros) want open space next to their properties. Politicians are caught between the two, but they often bow to developer interests. Andrew suggests that residential properties pay a higher tax, that this tax be used to retire undeveloped land, and that developers have the option of selling their parcels for open space — or developing them — via a tradable development permit that builds in the open space. This scheme works by linking present and future values, allowing future homeowners to pay off present developers.
Daniela C. has an easy answer to the problem of water that’s too cheap — let rate payers decide what the prices will be. Given that the current system tends to favor a minority — water hogs — at a cost (in terms of reduced reliability) to the majority, this makes a lot of sense. Of course, there’s the problem of “let’s charge nothing!” but that’s easily overcome by presenting voters with a series of “break even” price decisions. I like it!
Check in tomorrow for five ideas to address climate and environmental issues..
By admin | February 2, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
JG sent this column by Ben Baeder. It’s funny — and pointed. You can write your own bottom line…
Is it just me, or have we been in a water crisis my entire life? No joke, some of my earliest memories are sitting with my dad watching super-spooky “WATER CRISIS!” stories on the local news.
People in California’s water business are constantly screaming that the sky is falling - or that water or snow are not falling from it fast enough.
“Wolf! Wolf!,” they scream.
But every time I turn on the faucet, water comes out.
It’s cheap. It’s sort of clean. And it seems like there’s plenty of it.
I’m tired of hearing about water. It’s so boring.
[snip]
If water agencies are so hard-up, they should stop giving their workers big pay raises.
And if they are still broke, they should raise rates.
Otherwise, I don’t care anymore.
Seriously, Azusa Light and Water employees just got a one-time payment of 3.75 percent of their pay from the city. LA’s utility workers recently got a similar deal.
Maybe they were due for a raise, but they got it when everyone else in the private sector is getting hammered.
And, before its board buckled under political pressure, the Metropolitan Water District in October was on the verge of giving employees a 23-percent raise over the next five years.
So, do water companies have ample water and lots of money, or don’t they? I can’t tell.
If water is so scarce, why is the Inland Empire full of homes and mega malls?
Why are Southern California lawns lush and green?
Why, when my kids get bored, do I make their plastic slide a little more interesting by running the hose at the top?
All the while, farms in the Central Valley are going fallow and pumps in the Sacramento River Delta - at least until last year - were grinding up fish that are the bedrock of the area’s ecosystem.
Logic and economics aren’t applied to water issues. And I think I know why.
Quick, name the directors of your water district.
See. You don’t know. In the desk that is the human mind, water districts are just clutter that gets tossed away.
It’s so boring that our elected water board officials flit away public money on booze and conferences, and we don’t even pay attention.
Someone needs to do away with the whole system.
I wish I could say right now the best way to fix everything. My first instinct is: keep water rates low for businesses, farms and most residential customers, then jack the rates up super high for big consumers.
Hit extravagant people in the pocketbook.
If you want a Ferrari of a front lawn, you’re going to have to pay for it.
Maybe the wasters can pay for all the new water infrastructure we supposedly need.
Secondly, we need to get rid of water districts. Nobody watches them, and they’re inefficient.
I would offer more solutions, but my mind got too bored.
It’s on to something more exciting: prime numbers! Three, five, seven, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23. . .
By admin | February 2, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
We are were on another island. Gili Trawangan — like Nusa Lembongan [link] — has problems with fresh water shortages. As before, there is a fixed supply that is exceeded by demand. This demand — given no constraints on new developments, visitor numbers or use by visitors — is only likely to increase. (There are no signs in rooms saying “please use less water” and there are certainly no meters on rooms, to charge guests for the water they use.)
Hotels and guesthouses have responded to shortages in three ways:
- The expensive and big places have desalination units (cost about $25,000 for the machine and one-half their monthly electric bill). All their guests have “fresh” water at the tap.
- Luxury bungalows (we paid $40/night) have fresh water from 5 gallon jugs ($3 each) or big tanks that are shipped from shore; see photos. Again, fresh water from the tap.
- The other places (and local people, in their homes) have brackish water from their wells. We are now in one of those, and the salinity varies from noticeable to “way too much.”
Right, so that’s a little more information on water.
This island is interesting for two other features: One rare feature is that they are trying to “regrow” their reef by sinking cages offshore and then connecting electrical cables to them. A small current encourages corals and other beasties to perch on the cages and grow at a much faster rate than normal. This effort is supported by the local dive industry (big money) as a means of recovering from a past of sloppy anchoring and dynamite fishing. Fish here are VERY expensive: lobster cost about $60/kg; prawns slightly less.
One common feature is rubbish — everywhere. I picked up plastic bags and other stuff while snorkeling. There are plastic bottles everywhere and a surprising number of flip-flops and other shoe pieces. One thing that you do NOT see is empty beer bottles — that’s because they have a $0.20 deposit.
The reason that there’s so much trash around is that locals are not used to dealing with plastics. In the past, they would use bamboo or leaves and then toss the old stuff on the ground to wash away or get eaten. Now that stuff doesn’t “disappear” and the shoreline and reef is clogged with it.
Given the importance of tourism on this island (90+ percent of the economy), it seems like they should tackle trash, but they are probably not due to a tragedy of the commons: If one hotel cleans up its beach, then the trash of others just washes (or is dumped) there. So why clean?
It would be easy to fix this problem with a visitor trash tax that paid for trash to be hauled back to the mainland. Even better, locals could hold “trash olympics” with bounties and rewards for the largest volume of shoes, plastic bottles, etc. that were retrieved from the environment. I’d guess that a bounty of $0.01 per plastic bottle would result in HUGE piles of empty bottles — those that are currently scattered throughout the island. (Miscellaneous plastic would have to be rewarded by weight, of course.)
Bottom Line: Incentive matter. This island has water “shortages” because tourists do not pay for fresh water consumption; it has garbage everywhere because there is no reward for collecting it. Locals understand why beer bottles are worth returning and reefs worth rebuilding; they can apply the same knowledge to reduce the stress from over-drafting fresh water and dumping garbage.
By admin | February 2, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
TS sent this paper [pdf], which describes “The sustainable residential water use [sic]: Sustainability, efficiency and social equity. The European experience,” but you probably will want to skip the obtuse discussion of sustainability. The author wades through three pages of confusion before settling on (paraphrasing) “sustainable water use means that you use as much water (or less) than you receive.” No duh.
There’s a mildly interesting description of retail water pricing mechanisms (not prices) in Athens, Amsterdam, London, Seville and Tel Aviv. The author also points out that increasing block rates are not “fair” if they do not take the number of household members into account. No duh. Again.
By admin | February 1, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
TS sent this paper [pdf], which describes “The sustainable residential water use [sic]: Sustainability, efficiency and social equity. The European experience,” but you probably will want to skip the obtuse discussion of sustainability. The author wades through three pages of confusion before settling on (paraphrasing) “sustainable water use means that you use as much water (or less) than you receive.” No duh.
There’s a mildly interesting description of retail water pricing mechanisms (not prices) in Athens, Amsterdam, London, Seville and Tel Aviv. The author also points out that increasing block rates are not “fair” if they do not take the number of household members into account. No duh. Again.
By admin | February 1, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
JWT sent this reminder [pps] that SOMEONE cares about you!
By admin | February 1, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
David Foster sent this guest post, and he wants to know if the Lassi Shop (see below) should be (can be?) turned into a skit to teach people about water provision.
Just a few days ago, I watched Christiana Amanpour interviewing Robert F. Kennedy Junior, founder of the Water Keeper Alliance and all around friend of the poor and the environment. Kennedy began by quoting a clever observation by Mark Twain that: “Whiskey’s for drinking and Water’s for fighting”. Unfortunately, he left out another Mark Twain quote that I believe is just as applicable: “It ain’t what we don’t know that gets us in trouble. It’s what we know that ain’t necessarily so!”
Kennedy then began speaking on the many ills that confront the water sector and right at the very top was the Evil Threat of PRIVATIZATION. Now in my opinion Kennedy was absolutely right that sometimes private companies have done terrible things to the environment. Where I would fault him (and Amanpour) is in leaving the impression that private water systems have done more harm than public ones or that the poor and the environment would be just fine, if only we could keep the private sector out.
Now I know that I can’t get Kennedy or Amanpour to really visit the thousands of publicly run water systems throughout the developing world but I have this pipedream of having them come meet me at a “Lassi Shop” that is run on the same basic principles as a public water supply system in India.
There follows a brief description of the policies followed by the Lassi Shop — all of them close replicas of their respective counterparts in the typical municipal water system over here:
Meet Me At The Lassi Shop*
Imagine, if you will, a lassi shop that was run on the same basic principles as most Indian water supply systems…
By admin | January 31, 2010
Submitted by PlasticLess.com Blog
The majority of cotton swabs these days are made using plastic for the stick. The packaging is also usually plastic. If you are looking for a greener alternative, I saw some organic cotton swabs with paper sticks and cardboard packaging at The Body Shop.
I did a bit of research on cotton swabs after noticing them washing up on the beach. I was not surprised to learn that the most common use for these things is to stick them in our ears. I was slightly surprised to read that medical professionals are telling us to stop that. If people listened to medical advice, this particular bit of plastic waste could be reduced by over 50%.
Don’t stick cotton swabs in your ears
Photo Credit : TheMuuj
As far as all the other uses for cotton swabs goes, consider alternatives like toilet paper, tissues, or cotton balls. I stopped buying cotton swabs for the family ages ago and my makeup wearing daughters have adjusted somehow.
By admin | January 31, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
These posts are still relevant, so please comment!
BEST: Why the Peripheral Canal Will Happen
BEST: How Much Water Do Farmers Use? Not as much as you think. In this post (Farmers Don’t Use Much Water), I estimate that they “use” about 16 percent of developed water.
Pigouvian Tax Fail? A discussion that policy wonks will love.
Border Issues on the US/MX border.
BEST: Missing the Point — some people call for education on using less water; I say that higher prices are clear enough.
British Climate Change Skeptics — perhaps the guys behind the Climategate break-in?
By admin | January 31, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
This is a waterfall!
(Wangi Falls, Litchfield National Park, Northern Territory, Australia)
By admin | January 31, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
The showers on Nusa Lembongan (an island to the south of Bali, in Indonesia) are salty. So is the tap water. That’s because the “fresh” water comes from wells, and the aquifers that they draw on are being polluted with salt water. This salt water-intrusion is a recent problem in areas of the island where tourism has increased the demand for fresh water. (In non-touristy areas this is not a problem, because the fresh water from rainfall percolates into the ground, keeping salt water at a distance. In fact, there are fresh water springs coming out into the seabed in some places.)
As tourism developed, and developed without concern for the water demand that came with it (tourists in resorts use up to 500 liters/capita/day; it’s easy to see how they would use more since, for example, tourists take showers and locals use ladles to splash water on themselves from small basins called \emph{mandis}), supply stayed the same. In the resulting shortage, groundwater extraction outpaced groundwater replenishment, and salt water intrusion became a problem. That’s why the shower water is salty, and it’s going to get saltier because tourists do not pay for the quantity of water they use, existing hotel owners probably do not (except for the energy they use for pumping), and new hotels are unlikely to be limited (if at all) in accord to sustainable water supplies.
Bottom Line: A beautiful area will only stay that way if demand is limited to sustainable supply.
By admin | January 31, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
How to discuss food and ag like an adult.
An Italian-American delivers clean water in Afghanistan, by avoiding the big budgets of aid agencies and working with locals on their scale.
“A project to boost water resources in southern Africa, first announced in 2003, held its first executive meeting last month.” Guess they’re in a hurry…
Hong Kong’s water security is threatened by falling supplies from the mainland and excessive demand from prices that are too low. They need to read this blog.
Economics for Equity and the Environment Network (E3) is a national network of economists developing and applying new economic arguments for environmental protection with a social justice focus… E3 places economics graduate students in internships with environmental organizations during the summer months.
Russ Roberts talks to Clifford Winston about government failure vs market failure.
“David Uhlmann, professor at the University of Michigan School of Law, talks [MP3] with Bloomberg’s Tom Keene about the economics of clean drinking water.”
“Guatemala’s Lake Atitlán acquired a film of… blue-green algae… the nutrients feeding the bloom in Lake Atitlán come from sewage, agricultural run off, and increased run off as a result of deforestation around the lake basin.”
By admin | January 31, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
Hey! There’s a new poll (McFood?) to the right —>
Politicians are…
|
| …part of the solution to water problems |
 40% |
27 |
| …have nothing to do with water problems |
 3% |
2 |
| …the reason for water problems |
 57% |
39 |
| 68 votes total |
|
|
|
I agree that politicians are involved, and I think that they are part of the problem:
- They benefit from prolonging it, due to lobbying for them to intervene.
- They do not understand it, because it’s too complicated for anyone to understand — like any complex problem.
Bottom Line: Politicians should delegate more authority to more people, so that they can act in their own interest on water policy issues. The results will be better, and I won’t blame the politicians!
By admin | January 27, 2010
Submitted by R-Squared Energy Blog
First off, a couple of announcements. After being able to stay at home for the past two months, I have a very heavy travel schedule over the next two weeks. My participation here will probably be limited. I am off to Seattle tomorrow, on to the Netherlands from there, will visit Switzerland and Germany, back to the U.S. mainland, on to Canada, and then back to Hawaii. I have essentially piled up eight visits I need to make into one big, exhausting trip. My ability to post and respond to comments and e-mails will be spotty at best.
Second, my first essay went up yesterday at Forbes: The Price of Energy. My intention is to put something up there every week or two, and my primary goal is to be educational with the essays. I don’t plan to do any major debunking of company claims there, although I will still do that here occasionally. I will generally first post the stories targeted for Forbes on my blog, modify as appropriate based on the comments (in the case that something is incorrect or unclear), and then post it at Forbes.
Now, on to today’s story. Yesterday I saw a story on what is one of the silliest ideas I have ever heard from a politician. It isn’t the first time I have heard it mentioned, but I believe it is the first time one of our legislators actually announced they were going to take action on it:
Braley Announces Legislation to Require Country of Origin Labeling for Fuels
Washington, DC – In an address to the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association today, Rep. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa) announced he will introduce legislation to require country of origin labeling for fuels. Braley will introduce the bill, Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) for Fuels, tomorrow when he returns to Washington, DC.
The bill will require the Department of Energy to conduct a study and implement its recommendations to ensure American consumers have the ability to decide at the gas pump whether they want to purchase domestic fuel products, such as biofuels produced in Iowa, or gasoline produced in hostile nations that many terrorists call home.
“When we fill up our vehicles, there’s no existing method for us to know where the fuel we’re purchasing comes from and which nations are deriving the economic benefit from that purchase,” Braley said. “When we put food in our bodies or clothes on our backs, we know exactly where those products come from. Americans should have the same opportunity to vote with their wallets at the gas pump.
The intent of the bill is not the reason this is a dumb idea. I think most people would appreciate a choice of the country of origin for their fuel. We would ideally prefer that fuel to be sourced domestically (unless of course we have to pay a premium for it), and beyond that many would prefer to buy fuel from Mexico over Venezuela. So to be clear, I understand the spirit of the bill.
The silly part comes about in the attempted execution. The petroleum supply chain does not segregate products by country. Sure, a supertanker may leave Saudi Arabia with 100% Saudi crude, but once it arrives it gets mixed with whatever else may be left in the pipelines and crude tanks. Then, as it goes through the refinery, there are streams from many different sources. Finally, when it goes into the pipeline and on to the retailer it gets mixed with products from many different locations. In fact, in many places the fuel you put in your car has portions from many locations.
There are exceptions; the Billings Refinery I used to work at only got crude domestically or from Canada because no supertankers have access to the refinery. But then once product ships to Denver or toward the West Coast, it will inevitably mix with product derived from elsewhere (e.g., product coming up from Texas to Denver will probably contain some Venezuelan crude).
I wonder if one of our government leaders will figure out that essentially all of the corn ethanol produced in the U.S. today is enabled by petroleum, and that petroleum is inevitably sourced from imports. So I suppose the corn ethanol should be labeled as well: “This ethanol was enabled by Saudi/Venezuelan/Russian crude.” No, I suppose we will keep that skeleton in the closet.
The purpose of this bill from the Congressman from Iowa is of course to try to tilt the playing field in the direction of corn ethanol. That’s understandable, as that is his job. But the idea is either very poorly thought out, or it is just an example of him posturing for his constituents.
I don’t believe this bill has any chance of passing, but presuming for a moment that it did, the labels would all have to look like those food labels that say something like “This food was processed in a facility that also processed peanuts. It may have in fact touched peanuts at some point.”
Our product label would read like “This crude may have been sourced from the U.S. and/or one or more of the following 30 countries…” This would appear on every gasoline and diesel pump in the U.S., and would therefore be ignored by everyone. In other words, trying to pass such a bill is simply a waste of time and taxpayer money.
Note: This story was also characterized very well at Bnet by Kirsten Korosec:
Label My Crude: Iowa Congressman Wants Americans to Know Where Their Fuel Was Born
In that essay, Kirsten pointed out the impracticality of implementing such a plan, and also linked back to my essay on the Top 10 suppliers of crude to the U.S. to show readers where U.S. crude imports actually do come from.
By admin | January 27, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
Although Eric Schlosser wrote this book in 2001, I just got ’round to reading it. I was familiar with its themes from The Jungle, Bowling for Columbine, Roger and Me, The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Super Size Me, and other works on food, business, and culture, but this book still taught me quite a few things and made me think about numerous other things. It reinforced my conviction that a vegetarian diet is a good idea in the United States, that regulators — often “captured” by industry — do not always serve customers, and that more and cheaper is not always better.
The book has 10 chapters. In the first two, we learn of how fast food and sprawling urban southern California grew hand in hand, as technology and assembly lines fed a population losing touch with the origin and social dimension of food. In chapters 3 and 4, we get a damning view of labor practices and government subsidies. I was displeased to see how (predictably) job training grants and sub-minimum wages were used to decrease costs instead of benefiting teen employees.
Chapters 5 through 9 go into the production of fast food, and beef in particular. Although these practices (high-speed slaughter by ill-trained workers of unhealthy cattle, producing meat of dubious quality) are revolting, and appalling (especially since we do not appear to have made much improvement since Sinclair wrote The Jungle in 1906!), what really bothered me was the lobbying and deception by industry — and their support by politicians — in their attempt to sell burgers mixed with shit to consumers in “McHappyMeal” boxes.
If anything, this book reinforces the conventional wisdom that regulations can provide a useful minimum standard of behavior, preventing a race to the bottom (in quality, safety — and cost) among firms willing to cost costs or raise profits in places that do not, ultimately, serve consumers. Of particular note was the way in which the USDA was willing (is willing?) to buy the worst quality food from industrial slaughterhouses and feed it to children in schools. Ironically, those kids may be safer eating at fast food restaurants that care more about their reputation (and competition) than school bureaucrats.
The last chapter describes how the American idea of fast food fares in the rest of the world. Although foreigners may consume “McDos” because it’s chic, others do not because their traditional food (and bureaucrats) are better.
One thing I didn’t expect to read about was the cultural affinity between McDonald’s and Disney (clean and orderly), or the ways in which industrial production is so dehumanizing (see Small is Beautiful) and socially-destabilizing (see my review from this morning). Even worse is Schlosser’s killer point: all of these costs may come with little benefit: It’s possible to eat good food, served by well-paid workers, at low prices. (In ‘n’ Out, a small-family chain, sells burgers at prices that are competitive with McDonalds.) If that’s true, then we have to ask “where’s the profit?” in selling that beef, if the production costs are so “cheap.” I’d guess that some of it goes to shareholders, some goes to additional advertising, and some of it goes to executives, but I’d guess that a good chunk goes to powerful agribusinesses — ConAgra, ADM, Switft, Tyson, et al. — and paying for all the harm, lobbying and mistakes that accompany a system that’s being pushed 110 percent. That’s a pity, since it seems that we are paying a high cost for food that provides little benefit.
I give this book FIVE stars, despite an occasional lapse into populism.
Bottom Line: Cook for yourself and your family, from scratch. if you can’t do that, eat at a restaurant that does that same thing. If you can’t afford either, then reconsider how much you spend on food — on keeping yourself healthy — compared to big screen TVs, cars, dress shoes, etc. Anyone can eat healthy for less than $5 per day — start with rice and beans, fruits and vegetables — but few of us choose to. Take another look at your choices.
By admin | January 27, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
I like reading James C. Scott in the same way that I like reading Bill Easterly, Nassim Taleb or Hernando de Soto. His books contain good ideas, carefully explained, that change the way I see the world; see this post on his masterful Seeing Like a State.
In Weapons of the Weak: Everyday forms of Peasant Resistance (1985), Scott documents and explains the impact of the Green Revolution on peasants in “Sedaka,” a Malaysian village Scott lived in for 18 months.
The major components of the Green Revolution were a move to double-cropping paddy (wet) rice and the adoption of combine harvesters for the harvest and threshing of this rice. Scott pays attention to the impact of these changes on the poor of Sedaka (a pseudonym), their relations with the rich, and how their interactions represent a microcosm of the larger movement towards “dehumanized” capitalism and away from less-efficient, yet more “social” class relations in a small village.
By admin | January 27, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
JWT writes:
The U.S. Supreme Court removed all limitations and restrictions on campaign contributions. The U.S. Congress has now been turned over to any one with deep pockets, not just corporations. Individuals have no restrictions so people like Warren Buffet can buy any Congress person he wishes. The Arab Prince who owns most of Citibank can spend any amount he wishes to get the laws he likes, and he doesn’t even have to be a citizen.
We no longer have the best government money can buy. We now just have a government that anyone can buy — anyone with money.
I totally agree. And, even worse, the return of Leviathan — big government — means that the rich will be able to buy even more power. Woe is me.
Bottom Line: When politics and money mix, the resulting toxic cocktail doesn’t serve the average citizen.
By admin | January 27, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
I was planning to “re-run” my EEP100 class between Jan and May this year, but I am too busy. I am thinking of doing it in the fall, but only if there are at least 50 people committed to participating. Commitment requires that you pay $100 each, with a $50 rebate for completing the course.
The course would require that you read 2-4 books and several academic papers, that you watch my archived lectures (also available on MP3), take 2 exams, and (usually) participate during twice-weekly online chats, to discuss the materials. There will also be a wiki/discussion forum for students to help each other.
Your thoughts?
By admin | January 25, 2010
Submitted by R-Squared Energy Blog
It has been two years since I posted the Top 10 oil exporters to the U.S., so I thought I would update that list. In 2007, the U.S. imported just over 10 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil, with our top three suppliers being Canada (1.90 million bpd), Saudi Arabia (1.44 million bpd), and Mexico (1.41). Total oil imported into the U.S. in 2007 averaged 10.0 million bpd. OPEC countries supplied just over half of that - 5.3 million bpd. (All data sourced from the EIA).
Data for 2009 are available through October, so I tabulated the twelve-month period from November 2008 through October 2009. Total petroleum imports were down 7% from 2007 at 9.3 million bpd. Top U.S. suppliers for this time period were Canada (1.94 million bpd), Mexico (1.13 million bpd), and Saudi Arabia (1.09 million bpd).
Top 10 Sources for U.S. Crude Oil in 2009
1. Canada - 1.94 million bpd
2. Mexico - 1.13
3. Saudi Arabia - 1.09
4. Venezuela - 1.01
5. Nigeria - 0.74
6. Angola - 0.48
7. Iraq - 0.47
8. Brazil - 0.30
9. Algeria - 0.28
10. Columbia - 0.25
Observations
Canada remained the top supplier to the U.S., and their total exports to the U.S. actually increased slightly over 2007. Imports from Brazil and Columbia also increased.
OPEC supply was down to 4.6 million bpd, which is lower both in absolute terms and as a percentage of total imports (53.7% in 2007 versus 49.1% in 2009).
Dropping out of the Top 10 from 2007 were Ecuador and Kuwait. Taking their places were Brazil and Columbia.
Even though Mexico regained the 2nd spot from Saudi Arabia, total imports form Mexico fell by 20% over 2007.
The most unusual observation for me was that we actually imported a small amount of oil from China.
The overall theme seems to be that in general suppliers that are closer to the U.S. are gaining market share at the expense of those who have to ship their oil halfway around the world. However, there are a couple of important exceptions to that observation.
Equatorial Guinea did not make the list (15th place), but saw their exports to the U.S. increase by 67% over 2007. This trend could see them move into the Top 10 within a couple of years. Imports from Russia were up 98% over 2007, and they just missed the Top 10 (11th).
My expectation when I update this list again in 2012 is that either overall imports will be up, oil will be over $150/bbl, or both.
By admin | January 25, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
A loyal reader asks:
Do you know a lawyer in property rights and takings who might be inclined to write about how owning shares of water might become a more effective guard than regulation against pollution because of lawsuit threats to proptect value of water property?
If you have a name, email me or post it in the comments.
(I know that you can’t throw a show without hitting a water lawyer in California; I am interested to see if one will write a short brief for little or no money! 
By admin | January 25, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
via JWT:
- When his 38 caliber revolver failed to fire at his intended victim during a hold-up in Provo , Utah would-be robber Jason Ellison did something that can only inspire wonder. He peered down the barrel and tried the trigger again. This time it worked.
- The chef at a hotel in Switzerland lost a finger in a meat cutting machine and after a little shopping around, submitted a claim to his insurance company. The company expecting negligence sent out one of its men to have a look for himself. He tried the machine and he also lost a finger. The chef’s claim was approved.
- A man who shoveled snow for an hour to clear a space for his car during a blizzard in Chicago returned with his vehicle to find a woman had taken the space. Understandably, he shot her
- 4. After stopping for drinks at an illegal bar, a Zimbabwean bus driver found that the 20 mental patients he was supposed to be transporting from Harare to Bulawayo had escaped… Not wanting to admit his incompetence, the driver went to a nearby bus stop and offered everyone waiting there a free ride. He then delivered the passengers to the mental hospital, telling the staff that the patients were very excitable and prone to bizarre fantasies. The deception wasn’t discovered for 3 days.
- A teenager was in the hospital recovering from serious head wounds received from an oncoming train. When asked how he received the injuries, the lad told police that he was simply trying to see how close he could get his head to a moving train before he was hit.
- A man walked into a Louisiana Circle-K, put a $20 bill on the counter, and asked for change. When the clerk opened the cash drawer, the man pulled a gun and asked for all the cash in the register, which the clerk promptly provided. The man took the cash from the clerk and fled, leaving the $20 bill on the counter. The total amount of cash he got from the drawer… $15. If someone points a gun at you and gives you money, is a crime committed?
- Seems an Arkansas guy wanted some beer pretty badly.. He decided that he’d just throw a cinder block through a liquor store window, grab some booze, and run. So he lifted the cinder block and heaved it over his head at the window. The cinder block bounced back and hit the would-be thief on the head, knocking him unconscious. The liquor store window was made of Plexiglas.The whole event was caught on videotape.
- As a female shopper exited a South Carolina convenience store, a man grabbed her purse and ran. The clerk called 911 immediately, and the woman was able to give them a detailed description of the snatcher. Within minutes, the police apprehended the snatcher. They put him in the car and drove back to the store. The thief was then taken out of the car and told to stand there for a positive ID. To which he replied, “Yes, officer, that’s her. That’s the lady I stole the purse from.”
- The Ann Arbor News crime column reported that a man walked into a Burger King in Ypsilanti , Michigan at 5 A.M., flashed a gun, and demanded cash. The clerk turned him down because he said he couldn’t open the cash register without a food order. When the man ordered onion rings, the clerk said they weren’t available for breakfast. The man, frustrated, walked away.
- When a man attempted to siphon gasoline from a motor home parked on an Atlanta street, he got much more than he bargained for. Police arrived at the scene to find a very sick man curled up next to a motor home near spilled sewage. A police spokesman said that the man admitted to trying to steal gasoline, but he plugged his siphon hose into the motor home’s sewage tank by mistake. The owner of the vehicle declined to press charges saying that it was the best laugh he’d ever had.
By admin | January 25, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
In Toraja, Sulawesi, the local people are Christians, but they retain customs from earlier times. One of them is the “big funeral,” which will last 4-5 days. This funeral takes place weeks or months after someone’s death. (They are buried soon after death, but everyone knows that this, second funeral is the “official” one…) During these days, there are many ceremonies and feasts, and everyone is invited.
Rich people have bigger funerals, where there is food for all. The bigger your funeral, the higher your standing (meritocratic social standing). This is an obvious redistribution of wealth from rich to poor.
The gift you bring to the funeral is written down; when one of yours dies, a gift of equal value is brought.
Although death cannot be timed, the formal (second) funeral is timed, and it shares wealth among the community, over time, spacing out the feasts. The biggest feature of the feasts is the meat of water buffalo, and the more important/rich you are, the more buffalo die at your feasts. The one I attended (in this photo) was a “30 buffalo” affair. All of these buffalo were contributed by the six children of the deceased — all men in their 50s — and we were told that this was a rich family.
Because people must save for funerals, which can happen at any time, they are buffered against other problems (crop failures), which improves long-run survival.
Oh, and water makes an appearance in the Torajan death tradition: People use it as a general blessing (sprinkling it on buffalos to be sacrificed and on fires cooking food for attendees) and leave bottles of it next to graves. (They also leave bottles of tuak, a local liquor.)
Bottom Line: Communities without taxes and insurance find ways to pay taxes and provide insurance. That’s a human thing, not a bureaucratic plan.
By admin | January 24, 2010
Submitted by Aguanomics Blog
These posts are still relevant, so please comment!
BEST: Ethics and Water and the lack of ethics of water managers. Speaking of that, Pat Mulroy’s idea of Something Outrageous does NOT include charging more when water is scarce 
BEST: The End of the Western Population Boom? aka, the end of abundance (of water)
Shower Incentives — a customer tells his gym how to incentivize conservation.
Water Markets [sic] — no, we do NOT have them in California, but we also have A Word from the Farmers on that topic.
BEST: Stupid Water Bills — EBMUD fails. Big time. (Nothing changed?)
Soda Taxes are a good idea.
Wisdom?
Belief is private; knowledge is public.
Religion is belief; science is knowledge.
Make public policy accordingly.
…and a bit more philosophy about Water and Lifestyle
