Soils, Souls & Fuel

SUBHEAD: Can we construct an economy that can balance what is biologically and physically possible with what is socially and ethically desirable.

By Robert Jensen on 11 October 2010 in Observer -
(http://www.texasobserver.org/oped/soils-and-souls-the-promise-of-the-land)
 

Image above: "Prarie Grass Dress" by artist Robin Barcus Slonina. From (http://www.statesofdress.com).
 

Stop me if you’ve heard this one. A poet, an economist, and a biologist walk into a barn in Kansas and start talking. What do you get when you cross their ideas?
Answer: Hybrid vigor.
OK, the joke might not quite work unless you’re an agronomist (and maybe even the agronomists aren’t laughing), but it captures the importance of the conversations at The Land Institute’s annual gathering in Salina, Kansas.

In the search for alternatives to our dead-end industrial agriculture system, Land Institute researchers are pursuing plant breeding programs that just may be the key to post-oil farming. But beyond the science, “The Land” -- that’s how everyone there refers to the Institute in conversation -- provides a fertile space for mixing the ideas of people as well as the genes of plants. In both cases, the hybrid vigor -- the superior qualities that result from crossbreeding -- is exciting.

With the rain providing an intermittent backbeat on the barn roof throughout a Saturday in late September, the 2010 Prairie Festival began with three talks -- by poet/novelist Wendell Berry, economist Josh Farley, and biologist Sandra Steingraber -- that were insightful on their own, but even more intriguing as an intellectual mash-up.

The three were telling the story of how sin brought us to this place, how we must redefine success if we are to atone, and how essential that change is for our own safety. I had come expecting those kinds of insights and analyses, but surprisingly I left the barn that day with one revelation burning in my brain: While evil lurks in many places, it is most concentrated in fossil fuels. On Sunday morning, Wes Jackson, The Land’s co-founder and president, played the role of ecologically evangelical preacher. We do indeed face challenges, Jackson testifies, but there is a better way to be found in Natural Systems Agriculture. Perennial polycultures can deliver us from that evil. But before getting to the solutions, we have to understand the problem, which starts with sin.

Sin
Wendell Berry, who farms in his native Henry County, Kentucky, has become a kind of poet laureate of the sustainable agriculture movement, exploring culture and agriculture in verse, short stories, and novels. Establishing himself as a leading critic of industrial farming with his 1977 non-fiction book The Unsettling of America, he has been relentless in his analysis of the disastrous consequences of a consumption-obsessed, profit-driven society on both the human and the natural world. The lanky Kentuckian began his talk by noting that he is not from Kansas, and therefore would speak about his home state, the place he knows and loves.

That reflects one of Berry’s core themes, that the universal principles we articulate must be lived in intensely local fashion; one of his most well-known sayings is, “If you don’t know where you are, you don’t know who you are.” Wherever we are living, Berry argues, we’re in trouble as a consequence of a “land-destroying economy” that pursues “production-by-exhaustion.” That’s most clearly visible in the rapacious destruction of the land’s biotic communities in mountaintop-removal coal mining in his part of the world, Berry says, but also true of agriculture most everywhere.

Extracting fossil fuels from the ground is dangerous, and so is the way those fuels are used to work the ground in farming. The mining of the forests and soil, along with the extraction of fossil fuels, may have started innocently, but since the European conquest of the Americas, “It took us only a little more than 200 years to pass from intentions sometimes approximately good to this horrible result, in which our education, our religion, our politics, and our daily lives all are implicated,” Berry tells the packed house in The Land’s barn.
“This is original sin, round two.”
The sin comes not just in the greed that drives exploitation but the lack of attention we pay to “what is not obvious” -- the way we so often ignore the complexity of the world beyond our powers of observation and our failure to recognize the consequences of our inattention. Berry argues that when it takes 1,000 years for nature to produce one inch of topsoil, human farming practices that erode that soil are not simply bad practices but an act of desecration. While Berry doesn’t hesitate to condemn the corporate henchmen who direct much of this destruction and the politicians who enable them, his point is that “the carelessness of our economic life” means we all play a part in that desecration. We are, in fact, all sinners against the integrity of the ecosystem. Despite the severity of the critique, Berry articulates “authentic reasons for hope” that sound simple but require much of us.
“We can learn where we are, we can look around us and see,” he suggests. We also can rely on land health, “the capacity of the land for self-renewal,” and work at conservation, “our effort to understand and preserve that capacity.”
Berry doesn’t look to educational, political, or corporate institutions for much help in those efforts, suggesting that we instead look to “leadership from the bottom” that can be provided by groups and individuals “who without official permission or support or knowledge are seeing what needs to be done and doing it.” As a writer, Berry thinks not just about our actions but about our words. He argues that slogans such as “think globally, act locally” are of little value and that terms such as “green,” which are too easily exploited by corporations for marketing, are downright dangerous. “What gives hope is actual conversation, actual discourse, in which people say to one another in good faith, fully and exactly, what they know, and acknowledge honestly the limits of their knowledge,” he advises.

Success
Josh Farley found that saying exactly what he knows has rarely helped his career as an economist. Walking the grounds of The Land before his talk, he told me that the more he studied neoclassical economics, the more he realized that free-market ideology couldn’t account for ecological realities. Most of his advisers counseled him to stick to the dogma of the discipline, but Farley managed to finish a Ph.D. and stay true to his calling. Seeking out other mentors, he hooked up with Herman Daly, a central figure in “ecological economics” and ended up co-writing with Daly the 2003 text Ecological Economics: Principles and Applications.

 Now teaching at the University of Vermont, Farley is part of a small but growing group of economists who don’t simply treat the “environment” as a component of the economy but instead ask how we can construct an economy that can balance what is biologically and physically possible with what is socially and ethically desirable. The first step in that, Farley told the Prairie Festival audience, is to dispense with some of the mythologies and mistakes of neoclassical economics. High on the list of mythologies is the notion that our affluence is the product of the wonders of the capitalist market economy. Farley reminds us that capitalism developed alongside the exploitation of fossil fuels, first coal and then oil and natural gas. Our productivity is the result not of the magic of the market so much as the magic of fossil fuels. Given that a barrel of oil can do the work of 20,000 hours of human labor, Farley says, such dramatic expansion of productivity is not so magical after all. Markets also make mistakes. Humans use all that energy to transform our ecosystems faster than they can recharge or be restored.

Resources are mined and waste is spewed according to the dictates of the market, not the limits of the natural world. Farley points out that there’s no feedback loop in the market economy that stops us from destroying the planet, nothing that resets the prices of goods to reflect that destruction. That’s a problem, Farley says, in his trademark understated fashion. As a result, we get confused about terms such as efficiency, Farley says. Before fossil fuels, when humans lived almost exclusively on the energy of contemporary sunlight, one calorie burned by a worker could create 10 calories of food, but now we use 10 calories from oil to create one calorie of food.

And remember that the market has no way to account for the disastrous consequences of burning all those fossil fuels. And we’re increasingly dependent on non-renewable resources for the food we need to live. That’s efficiency? But perhaps most dangerous is the story capitalism tells us not about the natural world but about us. Glorifying greed, capitalism tells us we are nothing more than “atomic globules of desire” and that “we’re individuals, apart from community, and all we want is more and more and more.” We need, Farley explains, a different conception of success. To cope with these problems, Farley sets a modest goal: “A fundamental redesign of our economy.” Sounds naïve, but if we don’t find a way to do that, well, remember that the economy is based not on the “laws of economics” dreamed up by free-market ideologues but on “laws of nature” that we can’t dream away.

Safety
As a biologist, Sandra Steingraber has long studied the negative consequences of our inattention to human intervention into the natural world for individuals and ecosystems. She describes those two different trunks of the environmental movement: The focus on toxins’ effects on organisms, which first hit the public radar with the publication of Rachel Carson’s 1962 classic Silent Spring; and the focus on larger ecosystem effects, of which global warming/climate disruption are the gravest threat and which hit the public consciousness first with Bill McKibben’s book The End of Nature in 1989.

Steingraber is best known for her inquiry into the effects of those toxins, an investigation that has been intensely personal; she is a cancer survivor, and her 1997 book, Living Downstream: An Ecologist Looks at Cancer and the Environment, examined the lines of evidence that establish connections between cancer and chemical contamination. Recognizing that both trunks amount to a “de-creation of life,” Steingraber has decided to turn to what she believes is the source of the problems. Says Steingraber: The two trunks -- “the toxification of all life” and “the dissolution of the whole life support system on which the planet rests” -- have one root, fossil fuels. “When you light [fossil fuels] on fire, you destroy our life-support system through the creation of heat-trapping gases,” she explains. “When you turn them into synthetic chemicals with the power to break chromosomes and tinker with brain cells and hormones, you destroy children.”

 This realization has led Steingraber, a visiting scholar at Ithaca College living in upstate New York, to get involved with the movement to stop hydrofracking, a controversial method of getting at natural gas in shale that involves blasting millions of gallons water, sand and chemicals deep into the ground to force gas out of the rock. That process, she says, is another version of mountaintop-removal and deep-water drilling, another desperate attempt to extend a fossil-fuel economy that is fundamentally unsustainable. In such a world, no one is safe. We all live downstream.

Nature as measure
In the talks of Berry, Farley, and Steingraber -- three very different people with very different backgrounds and training -- the common thread is the recognition of the centrality of fossil fuels: to the desecration of land and communities, to the economy’s distortion of our sense of success, to the threats to the health of each of us and the ecosystem. In that Kansas barn, friends of The Land gathered out of a belief that there are alternatives, and that nowhere is the pursuit of those alternatives more important than in agriculture, the way in which we feed ourselves.

For many at Prairie Festival, the research being conducted at The Land is a key to our hopes, and those hopes are bolstered in Wes Jackson’s talk, which traditionally closes out the festival. Jackson, who grew up on a Kansas farm before earning a Ph.D. in plant genetics, gave up a comfortable university teaching position to start The Land in 1976. His talk reflects both his roots on the farm and his specialized training, but there also are strains of the preacher in his presentation, as he speaks of both sin and redemption.

That redemption in agriculture can come, Jackson preaches, from recognizing that industrial farming -- annual plants cultivated in monocultures, dependent on fossil fuel-based fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides -- has greatly expanded yields but at the cost of increased soil erosion and decreased soil fertility. That “failure of success” as Jackson calls it, leaves us no choice but to look to nature for guidance. Rather than mimicking industrial processes, farmers have to ask how natural ecosystems hold soil and ensure fertility. Wheat farmers in Kansas should be looking at the prairie for inspiration not a factory assembly line. That is the core of Natural Systems Agriculture, taking nature as measure.

The key to The Land’s research program is breeding perennial grains -- whose deeper roots help hold the soil in place -- that can produce adequate yields to feed us. Those perennials would ideally be planted in polycultures -- mixtures of plants that to help control pathogens and weeds without petrochemicals.

While this research is the heart of The Land, Jackson speaks as much about solidarity as he does about science, about the commitment it will take to see this through. Prairie Festival is in part about an exchange of information between the invited speakers, The Land’s staff, and guests. But equally important is the role of this annual gathering in creating what Jackson calls “a consecrated community” that is committed over the long haul to the project of an agriculture that can reverse the erosion and depletion of the soil and provide a model for reversing the larger degradation of the planetary ecosystem.

If that project is to succeed, it will have to combine the traditional wisdom that farmers acquire in the fields with the specialized knowledge that scientists develop in the laboratory. But Jackson knows it also requires faith, and he ends with a preacher’s charge to the congregation. Our task, he says, is to “save the soils as we save our souls.”


.

Primer on Foreclosure

SUBHEAD: What's Really Happening with the Foreclosure Crisis? It's a "pig passing through a python." [Publisher's note: Others, like James Kunstler, think the python won't pass this pig. See Ea O Ka Aina: Clowns in the Moonlight.] Image above: A Python digesting an unwary ungulate. From (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/glance/1017249/python-eats-womans-pet-goat). By John Carney on 11 October 2010 for CNBC.com - (http://www.cnbc.com//id/39617381) Last week, Bank of America announced that it was halting foreclosures in all fifty-states while it reviewed its foreclosure process for defects. Now several lawmakers on Capitol Hill are calling for other banks to initiate nationwide foreclosure freezes—a move which the Obama administration is currently opposing. So what’s going on here? Why is the foreclosure machinery of our nation’s largest banks suddenly grinding to a halt? What does this mean for the financial sector and the economy? Let’s start with the most basic questions first. Then I’ll explain some of the possible implications for homeowners, banks, and the economy. How did this thing get started? Ever since the housing bubble burst, there have been signs that there are serious problems with foreclosure practices. In some cases, the financial institution claiming it owns the mortgage has not been able to produce the underlying loan documents. In 2007, a federal judge held that Deutsche Bank lacked standing to foreclose in 14 cases because it could not produce the documents proving that it had been assigned the rights in the mortgages when they were securitized. This decision was followed by similar rulings in other states stopping foreclosure proceedings. Typically the judges would find that the banks that were servicing mortgages pooled into bonds weren’t able to prove they owned the mortgages. Why can’t they prove they own the mortgages? Every time a mortgages changes hands, the new owners are supposed to receive an “assignment” of the mortgage notes from the buyers. The assignment is typically a short little document signed by both the seller and buyer of the mortgage acknowledging the sale, which is then attached to the mortgage documents themselves and delivered to the new owner. When a mortgage is securitized it is typically sold to a Wall Street firm, which pools the mortgage with thousands of others. Investors buy slices of the pool, entitling them to cash-flows from the mortgage payments. The actual mortgages are assigned to a newly created investment vehicle. A servicer is tasked with ensuring the payments to borrowers get divided up properly and that delinquent borrowers get foreclosed upon. Here’s where things get tricky. When a mortgage is securitized, the investors in the mortgage bonds don’t get assignments or notes. The investment vehicle doesn’t get the assignments or notes either. Instead, the physical notes are typically sent to a document repository company. The transfer of interests is noted in an electronic database. But during the height of the housing bubble, investment banks were churning out mortgage bonds in such a frenzy, sometimes the assignments never got executed and mortgage notes never got delivered. Keep in mind that this was during the years when lenders were giving out low-doc and no-doc mortgages. It was inevitable that the fast and loose and slightly documented culture would not stop at the mortgage originator but stretch all the way through the process. (For more on this, see RortyBomb’s excellent discussion of the securitization process, complete with nifty and highly informative charts.) For most mortgages, the note probably still exists somewhere. One problem that has arisen, however, is that some of the original mortgage lenders have gone under or been acquired by a larger bank. This can make tracking down the notes difficult, if not impossible. Why am I just learning about this mess now? This issue has been quietly simmering in the background of the housing crisis for quite some time. Gretchen Mortgenson of the New York Times wrote about it back in 2007. It gave rise to a “show me the note” movement of people contesting foreclosure proceedings. But what really kicked off the latest developments was the deposition of a GMAC loan officer named Jeffrey Stephan, which revealed deep and perhaps pervasive flaws in the foreclosure practices of our largest banks. Stephan admitted in a sworn deposition in Pennsylvania that he signed off on up to 10,000 foreclosure documents a month for five years. He said that he hadn’t reviewed the mortgage or foreclosure documents thoroughly. He quickly became known by the pejorative “robo-signer” for this way of getting mortgages through. This prompted Ally, which owns the GMAC mortgage company, to halt foreclosures in 23 so-called “judicial states.” Because Stephan also signed foreclosures for hundreds of other mortgage companies, including J.P. Morgan Chase, the problem is not limited to GMAC. In fact, JP Morgan Chase also halted foreclosures in the judicial states. Wait, what’s this about judicial states? The majority of states in the country allow banks to foreclose on defaulted mortgages without going to court. They simply deliver the borrower a notice of the foreclosure sale. This is the method of foreclosure preferred by banks, since it is much faster and easier to execute the foreclosure sale, and much more difficult for borrowers to contest. Twenty-three states, however, require banks to go to court to get a foreclosure order. These are the “judicial states.” In these states, banks are typically required to produce a sworn and notarized affidavit of a loan officer and submit the mortgage documents. Often, however, judges will issue foreclosure orders without the mortgage documents so long as the borrower doesn’t contest this point. Keep in mind that in both judicial and non-judicial states, there are strong legal presumptions that favor the banks. So long as they have the mortgage note and the loan is delinquent—or so long as no one argues that they aren’t the owners of the mortgage or that borrower is not in default—the bank will almost always get the foreclosure. But as the “show me the note” movement took off, more and more homeowners began to contest foreclosures by demanding to see the notes and, if the loan had been transferred or securitized, the assignment agreements. This typically was not fatal to banks seeking foreclosures. They could make up for the lost notes with lost note affidavits and retro-actively build an assignment chain. The worst that would happen, from the bank’s perspective, was that the foreclosure would be delayed. In some cases, however, banks seem to have not even been able to manage even this kind of corrective action. Evidence has been produced to show that notarizations have been faked, documents forged, and folks like Stephan have simply been operating as foreclosure bots. So is this just a concern for “judicial states?” Although banks first shut down foreclosures in judicial states, the lack of documentation is a problem in any jurisdiction. Homeowners contesting foreclosures in both non-judicial and judicial states can win if the bank cannot provide documents proving it owns the mortgage. In judicial states, however, the banks are especially exposed because they must initiate a lawsuit to get a foreclosure. If they have been submitting false documents to the court, they could be sanctioned and fined. Realizing that they had few internal controls over their own foreclosure practices, banks wisely shut down foreclosures in the states where they had the most exposure. In non-judicial states, banks aren’t required to submit anything to the court until they are sued by a homeowner seeking to stop a foreclosure. That means that they are far less likely to submit fraudulent documents, since the process has already been slowed. Nonetheless, banks may still find themselves swamped by challenges. No one really knows how badly the missing documentation problem is at the banks. Are we making a mountain out of a molehill? The Wall Street Journal told me this is just about “paperwork” and politics. Our friends at the Journal are seriously misguided on this issue. (Note: my brother, Brian Carney, is on the editorial board of the Journal.) The requirement that banks be able to prove ownership of mortgages by producing notes and assignments reflects a long-settled view about the necessity of written contracts in real estate transactions. Long before the founding of our Republic, England adopted what is commonly called the “Statute of Frauds.” It required that real estate conveyances be recorded in writing and signed. Similar laws apply in almost every state in the Union. Part of the point of the writing requirement is to allow the government the transparency it needs to enforce property rights, including the right to foreclose on a home. If courts were to treat this as mere “paperwork” that was irrelevant to the cases, both property rights and the rule-of-law would suffer. It’s surprising that the Journal’s editorial page would take this stance. Now, if the problem truly is just sloppy work on the part of robo-signers, banks can likely resume foreclosures before too long. But many suspect that the reason banks were falsifying their knowledge about the possession of loan documents is that the banks do not actually have the documents and don’t know where to find them. This could permanently impair their ability to foreclose on some properties. What does this mean for the banks? In the first place, the slowdown in foreclosure sales might hit the revenues of the banks. The defaulted loans aren’t spinning off revenue and now the foreclosures aren’t producing revenue either. If the foreclosure freezes last long enough, this could hit the bottom lines of the banks. At the very least, banks should be adjusting the estimates on the likelihood of short-term recovery values for their mortgage portfolios. The fact that banks securitized loans but did not get proper assignments of the mortgage notes may find themselves liable to lawsuits from investors. A typical mortgage bond issuance includes representations and warranties that all the proper documentation has been obtained. Banks could find themselves liable for a breach of these warranties. This could also turn into a fight between investors of junior and senior tranches of mortgage bonds. Here’s how the Journal describes this fight:
When houses that have been packaged into a mortgage bond are liquidated at a foreclosure sale—the very end of the foreclosure process—the holders of the junior, or riskiest debt, would be the first investors to take losses. But if a foreclosure is delayed, the servicer must typically keep advancing payments that will go to all bondholders, including the junior debt holders, even though the home loan itself is producing no revenue stream.
The latest events thus set up an odd circumstance where junior bondholders—typically at the bottom of the credit structure—could actually end up better off than they expected. Senior bondholders, typically at the top, could end up worse off. Not surprisingly, senior debt holders want banks to foreclose faster to reduce expenses. Junior bondholders are generally happy to stretch things out. What is more, it isn't entirely clear how the costs of re-processing tens of thousands of mortgages will be allocated. Those costs could be "significant" said Andrew Sandler, a Washington, D.C., attorney who represents mortgage companies. The most damaging thing that could happen to banks would be the discovery that they simply cannot prove they hold a mortgage on a house. In that case, the loan would probably have to be written down to near zero. Even for current loans, the regulatory reserve requirements would double as the loan would no longer be a functional mortgage but an ordinary consumer loan. Depending on the size of the “no docs” portion of the loan portfolio, this might be a minor blip or require a bank to raise new capital to fill the hole in the balance sheet. What does this mean for the housing market and the economy? Get ready to hear the phrase “pig through the python” a lot. For example, “We need to get the pig through the python very quickly so that the market can be free of uncertainty.” This is the favorite metaphor of bankers discussing the foreclosure crisis. The idea is that anything that slows down foreclosures will unsteady the housing market. There’s a lot of truth to this. Buyers will hesitate to bid on foreclosure sales if they are not confident the foreclosure is legitimate. Other buyers may worry that the lack of foreclosure sales in an area is a false indicator of the health of the local housing market. Banks concerned about the recovery values of their mortgage portfolios and higher capital requirements, may pull back lending even further than they already have. In short, this could be the beginning of the second leg of the credit crunch. .

Kauai Candidate Forum

SUBHEAD: Apollo Kauai, Zero Waste & People for the Preservation of Kauai present 2010 candidates. Image above: Photo from WKBPA 30 August 2010 forum. From l to r M. Repozo, T. Bynum, E. Justus. From (http://thegardenisland.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_bef519f2-bb16-11df-bfc4-001cc4c03286.html). By Judie Hoeppner on 8 October 2010 - WHAT: Kauai Mayoral and Council candidate's public forum. WHEN: 17 October 2010 from 3-6pm WHERE: Kapaa Elementary School Cafeteria How can we as a community create badly needed jobs and at the same time move our island toward alternative forms of energy, promote zero waste and encourage food and water security. The community needs to know where candidates stand on the important issues that affect all of us: the economy, land use, transportation, waste and the environment. Hear from mayoral and council candidates on Sunday, October 17 at Kapaa Elementary School Cafeteria from 3 – 6pm. The public will have a chance to meet-and-greet with candidates from 3 – 3:30 pm, followed by a facilitated question-answer forum. All mayoral and a majority of council candidates have confirmed their participation in this event. Questions have been formulated by representatives from the above organizations, as well as by representatives from the agriculture and Native Hawaiian communities. The candidates’ forum is free and open to the public. There will be a CFL bulb exchange courtesy of Blue Planet. The forum will be recorded and re-broadcast on KKCR and Ho`ike public television until the election. For more information about the candidates’ forum - CONTACT: Judie Hoeppner email: judie@aloha.net phone: 639-0212 SPONSORS: Apollo Kauai Zero Waste People for the Preservation of Kauai .

Clowns in the Moonlight

SUBHEAD: Banking authorities were shocked find a lot of mortgage paper was not quite in order. Image above: Detail of painting "The Dog Show" by Mark Bryan (2002, 20"x16"). From (http://www.artofmarkbryan.com/dog_show.html). By James Kunstler on 10 October 2010 in Kunstler.com - (http://kunstler.com/blog/2010/10/bank-shot.html) The banking authorities were shocked - shocked - to discover last week that an awful lot of mortgage paper in this country is not quite in order... appears to contain, er, irregularities... seems less than kosher... frankly, exudes an odor like unto dead carp or, shall we say, a heap of dead carp the size of the building at 3900 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. Any day now we will hear that... mistakes... were... made.
Is it indelicate to say that the USA as an enterprise has its head so deeply and firmly up its ass that the all the proctologists alive on planet Earth could not extract the collective cranium from the collective cloacal chamber even with the aid of a Bucyrus-Erie 1060-WX bucket-wheel excavator? Like, where were we the past ten years? Surely not everybody in the nation was doing bong hits while playing Grand Theft Auto, or watching The Real Housewives of New Jersey, or downing tequila shots and Percocets in the parking lot of the Talladega Superspeedway, or cooking meth in the family room, or whacking it to Internet porn, or searching for "excitement" in one of America's 450 commercial gambling casinos.
Did nobody, for instance at Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, review any of the paperwork fluttering in from places like Countrywide or Ditech and scores of other boiler rooms where mortgages were hatched like Peking ducklings? There was an awful lot of it, I'm sure, but aren't there a lot of seat-warmers at Fannie and Freddie who collect their salaries for the express purpose of reading mortgage documents? Was nobody the least bit suspicious about the mysterious flurry of "restaurant employees" and "lawn-care technicians" buying million-dollar condominiums with no money down at terms that would make a three-card monte dealer weep with laughter? After all, they had to sort and bundle all these contracts for the likes of Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan and Citibank - the list isn't that long, but you get the picture....
And speaking of these august institutions, didn't anybody in the divisions charged with assembling complex securities composed of mortgages, or composed of bets against bundles of mortgages, or composed of some notion of something dimly related to a rumor of mortgage lending - didn't any of these expensively-educated chaps or lasses pause a moment in their aardvark-like labors of bonus-seeking to withdraw their snouts from the moist ground where swindles pupate and at least goggle in self-admiration at the fantastic legal novelty of their endeavors.
And what of the numberless agencies, federal on down, starting with, say, the Office of Thrift Supervision, or the Comptroller of the Currency, or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, or the chairpersons of a dozen senate and house subcommittees on matters related to finance, or the various inspectors general from sea to shining sea or the attorneys general of all fifty states plus the US Department of Justice, or the countless fiduciary officers of the pension funds who tripped over each other buying all the tainted paper churned out like so much Purina Rat Chow - or, for Godsake, a lonely loan officer here or there with something resembling a conscience?
Nobody in the USA noticed anything the least bit fishy. And now all that epic rot has eaten through the last hanging tendrils of the banking system. And the whole shootin' match is fixing to seize up and blow like a Chevy Big Block Super Stroker 632 engine that some clown has poured karo syrup into.
But, sadly, I can only return to the trope of cranial rectosis. And when your head is in such a dark place, it's hard to see the truth, let alone tell something you can't even see. And sadly too, the truth is that this ghastly mortgage fiasco was a fraud that the whole nation perpetrated on itself in a tragic rush to get something for nothing. Since the failure of authority is complete, it's now up to nature to act as the arresting officer. She's a harsh mistress. She's going to kick our ass.
I'm sorry, but I don't see anyway out of this. With fraud absolutely everywhere in our banking system, like some advanced metastatic cancer, financial metabolism comes to a sickening stop. Nobody can buy or sell property. Nobody can trust any American financial institution. Money can't circulate. Nobody will be able to get any money. It won't be long before that translates into nobody getting any food. We may be a nation of clowns, but as Lon Chaney famously observed a while ago - when explaining his technique of horror movie-making - "...there's nothing funny about a clown in the moonlight...." .

Wile E. Coyote suspended reality

SUBHEAD: It’s already way too late to repair the damage done by the myopic policies we've witnessed ever since the world economies started crumbling. Image above: Chuck Jone's Wile E. Coyote trapped by his own schemes to snare the elusive Road Runner. From (http://www.cartoongallery.com/Webstore/product.php?printable=Y&productid=9000900). By Ilargi on 8 September 2010 for The Automatic Earth - (http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/2010/10/october-8-2010-wile-es-suspended.html) It's not the first time, guys, and it won’t be the last by the looks of it. But I do apparently have to repeat it from time to time: we're still having the wrong conversations. And I'm increasingly losing hope that we’ll switch to the right ones before it no longer matters what we talk about. I was thinking about this the past few days looking at the gold price situation being discussed everywhere, including in the Automatic Earth comment sections. People feel smart for buying gold at the right time, and gold is at a record high (well, in US dollars; not in euro’s, it’s not), we've all seen it. Still, the reason why The Automatic Earth doesn't focus on gold or its price is very simple: it's not the right conversation to have at this point in time. When we're done, as a society, as a national and global economy, with this round of real life Jeopardy behind us, 90-something percent of those who today see themselves as investors will no longer be that, and will have had to sell their gold and silver and most of their other possessions just to keep their families clothed, warm and fed. Unfortunately, that realization hasn't seeped through at all. First off, we're not smart enough to do the math, and second, we wish to wish it all away. When our financial systems began to shake in 2007 and large chunks started to fall off in Jericho fashion in 2008, we were not witnessing yet another cyclical economic move, not another run of the mill thirteen in a dozen recession. We were watching the end of the financial system as we had come to know it. And we still are. We're watching Wile E. Coyote on a broken reel. The foundation of it all is US (un)employment and the housing market. Well, home prices have not stabilized, in the same sense that Wile E. Coyote does not stabilize in his infamous mid air moments, but is stuck in a temporary state of suspension. He only stabilizes once he hits the ground below. Physics 101, and economics 101, though you wouldn't know the latter from those who ply the trade. Wonder who’ll get the Economics Fauxbel one of these days. It’ll be hard to beat the thickness of handing the thing to Krugman last year. Like Wile. E., US home prices today are suspended in mid air, and barely at that (they’re actually down 30%). The chances that they’ll go up from here are exceedingly small. And that is very bad news for the financial system, for the government and for all Americans, not just because everyone homeowner stands to lose another $100,000 or so in equity, but also because of the tens if not hundreds of trillions in derivatives written on the values of these homes and the mortgages they were "financed" with. Nobody expects Wile E. to rise up once he's run off the cliff, or even linger at the same altitude for too long; yet, bizarrely and unfortunately, many do expect the US housing market, and indeed the American economy, to do just that. It's time to stop fooling yourselves. For the US economy, housing market and labor market, like for Wile E., there’s only one way to go from here, and that is down. It's not going to come back for a very long time, if ever. And that, if nothing else, means our decisions, as a society and as individuals, will have to be radically different from what they would be if there were a chance of a recovery. It has been entertaining to read about the foreclosure scandals lately; turns out, they were based all along on paperwork as fabricated as the mortgages that gave birth to them, and that keep on giving. But when I see people expressing hope that this will finally stick it to the banks, and teach 'em a lesson, I despair. Look, all Washington has done over the past 2-3 years (or even 20-30 years) has been to protect the banks on Wall Street. Why would you think that will stop now? US banks as a whole are broke, broker, broken, and they wouldn't survive any major change that would imperil their revenues. In the end, they won't survive, period, but for now they're still just zombies stuck in a Wile E. moment, seemingly alive. Yet, even as I see people applaud Obama for not signing a legal document that would make it easier for banks to throw Americans out of their homes, the overall policy direction remains the same: save the banks at all costs, wherein “all costs" means costs to taxpayers. This has been the policy all along, and it's been the wrong one all along too. And that is, once again, because we are still having the wrong conversations. Everybody and their pet armadillos keep saying the same thing, even if it is from different viewpoints: it's either something or other will "hurt the recovery", or the opposite will. But there is no recovery, and never has been other than in funny fuzzy government stats, and despite the silly GDP data all politicians love, there won't be, not for a very long time, if ever. We need to stop seeing the world through these rosy glasses that are starting to look seriously ridiculous on our faces. Then again, from where I’m sitting, it’s already way too late to repair the damage done by the myopic policies we've witnessed ever since the walls started crumbling. Saving the banking system was always the wrong priority. At least from the point of view of the average American. Or Brit, or German. The crucial idea in all this that makes it all go away is growth. We need to get back to growth as soon as we possibly can, or we're all screwed. So screwed indeed that the very thought of a possible non-growth period has been banned from all national political and media centers. Like, to reiterate it once more, Tim Geithner telling the US Senate in 2009 that there was no need for a Plan B if his great plan, which has since failed spectacularly, might fail. And there's something to be said for this way of looking at things, at least if you're Geithner or Obama or Jamie Dimon or any of their equivalents abroad. If these people would give up the fight for (economic) growth, and say there won't be any for years to come, they'd lose their powerful positions in an instant, only to be replaced by the next in line boyo willing to declare straight-faced that recovery is just around the corner. There are two things that have kept up the appearance of something resembling normality, or recovery, name it what you will, so far. One is the trillions of dollars, euros, what have you, in clueless citizens' -future- tax revenues that have been thrown down the pit of financial losses -wagers- in the banking system. The second is the suspension in mid-air (Hello, Wile E.!) of accounting standards across the board. An asset bought for $1000 that couldn't today be sold for $10, can remain on a balance sheet for the full paper value. In fact, billions of such assets do across the globe. Why? The prospect of future growth, of course. One day, they’ll be worth $1000 again, nay, $5000, and so why would we mark them to market? That's where we get back to housing: banks, pension funds, market funds, let’s not forget the Fed, are loaded with such "assets". All, or nearly all, on balance sheets for 100 cents on the buck, and all verging on worthlessness. Washington will try very hard, and likely succeed, to find a way to not let the banks pay for their own crimes, which is what the automated foreclosure proceedings add up to. According to the official mantra, letting the main banks go belly-up would kill the entire system. Letting millions of Americans go belly-up, not so much. It's all a matter of priorities, don't you know, and you, yeah you, are not the priority. But these same banks still have vaults overflowing with worthless and useless assets, and nothing has been done about that other than the Fed buying $1-2 trillion worth of them with taxpayer funds, and Mother-of-God only knows how much "money" being spilled by now between TARP and other stimuli on the one side, and on the other banks borrowing at 0% from the Fed to buy Treasuries which can be parked at 3-4% at the same Fed the same day. They are labeled "systemically important", or Too Big to Fail, these banks. But the only system they're important for is the one that says recovery is always just around the corner, the one that controls Washington, and all politicians that reside there. And that is simply the wrong conversation. We -pretty- desperately need to figure out what we'll do if we in fact need that Plan B. But there's nothing out there. Even George Soros talks about avoiding things that "will hurt the recovery". In the end, the math is simple. If home prices keep falling, unemployment numbers keep rising. That correlation has been proven time and again. And if this happens (make that when), mortgage-backed securities will continue to fall in whatever "value" they still might have. That in turn means banks will need to be restructured, re-financed, re-Frankensteined. It also means Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac become a multi-trillion dollar liability on the American people, many of whom will, the horror, the horror, by then just happen to have lost that $100,000 plus in equity on their American Dream property. This will lead to an explosion in unemployment, since ever fewer people will have any discretionary income needed to keep stores and factories open, which will then hammer home prices even more. Consequently, tax revenues at all levels will scrape the gutters, forcing governments at all levels to lay off more workers, and so on: you can by now finish the story yourself and color the pictures. It's called debt deflation, people, and once you’re in debt way over your head as a society or as an individual there's nothing you can do but to lay low and let it run its course. The Bureau of Labor Statistics September U3 unemployment just came in at 9.6%, unchanged from August. Curious, since Gallup put it at 10.1%. The BLS U6 number, the wider, more realistic gauge, jumped from 16.7% to 17.1%. John Williams' SGS alternate number is closing in at 23%. Only Spain resembles that in the western world. If you can accept that 90-odd% of US banks are zombie banks (toxic assets!), that nothing has changed despite the money that was transferred from you to them, that their losses on toxic paper are far worse than anything you could ever afford, then you will have to accept that you are zombies too, zombies, not investors, and that it's immaterial whether you make a nickel or two on gold purchases, that those matter only in Wile E. Coyote's suspended cartoon reality, not in yours. One last thing to take with you: If time is money, we're living on borrowed time. .

Quick Notes From ASPO

SUBHEAD: What's next after the peak is reached (was reached a long time ago) and the sickening slide begins in earnest? Image above: Still from 2005 remake of "War of the Worlds". From (http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=38091). By Steve Ludlum on 9 October 2010 in Economic Undertow - (http://economic-undertow.blogspot.com/2010/10/quick-notes-from-aspo.html) The Association for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO) world convention is taking place this year for the first time in Washington, DC, at the downtown Hyatt Regency Hotel. This is - according to ASPO rumors - the first step to the Association becoming yet another crummy lobbying group. Peak Oil is dead, long live ... what, exactly? Peak oil having taken place in the past, the consequence being lived by all in the present, the next form of organization is yet to emerge. The characters are vivid, the stage is banal. What else is there? The great paradigm of our time is the execution of imagination in the back alley ... of imagination. The hotel itself is of a piece with our hypertrophic empire: a massive glass box cantilevered into and over itself with forms that call to mind the Matrix (perhaps under the parking level). Inside are reminders of the obliterating massiveness of the Establishment. There are several conventions taking place in this hotel simultaneously. Most appear to be job fairs/spamming events for 'security' and 'intelligence' outfits. In and among the various misfits and experts wandering more or less aimlessly scurry bright looking young hotel people in various shades of trendy charcoal gray pretending to be doing something important. Presumably all have college degrees and all earn a bit more than minimum wage. The entire peak oil concept - as simple to grasp as a leaky bucket - is not worth examining again. What's next after the peak is reached (was reached a long time ago) and the sickening slide begins in earnest? The group is decidedly without concrete answers. It takes imagination to conceptualize the peak oil effect on consumers. The most effective promoters describe in simple language what they see in their minds' eyes. This is one reason why the most effective peak oil articulations are from artists and writers. How we cope defies imagination. Our cultural prejudices presuppose a sci-fi Matrix future. How to create way of life without high-energy-consumption machines and all that goes with them has not been imagined by the crowd that has spent the best parts of their working lives seeking validation for what has been swept under the rug as not having any real importance. Here comes Andy Warhol's fifteen seconds of fame as peak oil's effects will be felt at the point where people will not be able pass credit where it is due or not. Even in its end, the culture holds all in its death's grip. Interesting folks include Arch-Druid John Michael Greer, Diva of Deflation Nicole Foss, Sharon Astyk, Oil Drum stalwart Gail Tverberg, Good talks so far by Charlie Hall, Tom Whipple, Chris Martenson, Andre Angelantoni, Jeffrey Brown. Gregor MacDonald and I agreed that California is nearing (hopefully) its 'Tainter Moment' of accelerated simplification and might become a cheap (and fun) place to live, again. I have some recordings but I haven't figured out the 'tech' yet. Most annoying opportunity let slip away was a chance to jump up and down on the head of Admiral Rice and Congressman Roscoe Bartlett. Both are actors pretending to be establishment figures. I've become a nice guy: "Why isn't the government/military doing their jobs?" This is an area where I need to improve; the be a more effective rabble rouser! From the 'Nicole Foss Sucks All The Air Out Of The Room' department, fellow Canadian Rick Munroe, Energy Security Analyst for the National Farmer's Union of Canada describes buttonholing agencies both in Canada and in the US to determine their level of preparedness. Observation: the militaries are discussing the issue of peak liquid fuels, the responsible civilian agencies are not. Very sobering ... John Michael Greer suggests that large scale immigration of Asians to the US (Canadian) west coast is likely as nations such as Japan have limited capability to feed themselves in a fuel constrained environment. John Michael is a China bull! Knock me ovah with a fethah! More on China, later. Chris Martenson suggests that gold is a form of money that does not incur a liability in its creation. I would leave the reader to disagree, but feel compelled to note that mining and refining gold represents a liability generally paid for in other forms of money. Managing a surplus of it it represents a liability that increases ... at a greater rate than the value of the surplus. In this sense, gold is no different from all other forms of money. This is in fact true of all surpluses and is Steve's First Law of Economics. Jeff Rubin asks (rhetorically) what sub-prime mortgages - using Cleveland as an example - caused an economic meltdown worldwide? Good question! The answer is rising oil prices, of course. Jeff then gave a 'Net Export' sales pitch ... Jeff Rubin proves you can go far in economics if you have the right haircut. Jeff Vail suggests that suburbia is worth saving. Saving for what? He makes the example of a suburban 'farmer' who feeds two people from a 1/6 acre lot. Question for Jeff: how many tons of food are now coming from suburbia? How many come from farms? David Murphy gives a good description of the 'Waste- Based Economy'. He notes that it only functions well with prices @ $35 a barrel. Andre Angelantoni has probably the best cultural take: we all are engaged in long- running social conversations. Most of these are about how we organize ourselves. These tend to aggressively defend their content. They also promote strategies that are not re- examined once they are implemented! The upshot: the social conversations continually reinforces failure. Nicole Foss did indeed suck all the air out of a very large room full of people who have a background in the material. Her best line had the world competing militarily for scarce energy; "is not going to be very pleasant!" ... and everyone laughed. It's not the material it's how you deliver it. Robert Hirsch didn't go far enough with his presentation, hoping for a return to a semblance of business as usual. He suggests a context where breakdowns increase due to the finance disorders; then liquid fuels decline causing what would likely be even more breakdowns. Out of this cauldron of increasing societal failures would emerge 'mitigations' which would presumably be electric cars. Please pass the fairy dust ... Meanwhile, out in the 'Greater World' a number of soft commodities 'limit up' yesterday. Other prices were up sharply. This is from Bloomberg, yesterday: Agriculture
PRICE
CHANGE
% UP
DATE
CANOLA FUTR (WCE) (CAD/MT)
497.500
14.900
3.09
10/08
COCOA FUTURE (USD/MT)
2803.000
63.000
2.30
10/08
COCOA FUTURE - LI (GBP/MT)
1870.000
30.000
1.63
10/08
COFFEE 'C' FUTURE (USd/lb.)
182.150
8.700
5.02
10/08
CORN FUTURE (USd/bu.)
528.250
30.000
6.02
10/08
COTTON NO.2 FUTR (USd/lb.)
107.170
3.420
3.30
10/08
FCOJ-A FUTURE (USd/lb.)
153.750
2.550
1.69
10/08
LUMBER FUTURE ($/1,000 board ft.)
233.000
10.000
4.48
10/08
OAT FUTURE (USd/bu.)
369.500
20.000
5.72
10/08
ROUGH RICE (CBOT) (USD/cwt)
13.250
0.455
3.56
10/08
SOYBEAN FUTURE (USd/bu.)
1135.000
70.000
6.57
10/08
SOYBEAN MEAL FUTR (USD/T.)
316.200
20.000
6.75
10/08
SOYBEAN OIL FUTR (USd/lb.)
46.620
2.500
5.67
10/08
SUGAR #11 (WORLD) (USd/lb.)
26.320
1.160
4.61
10/08
WHEAT FUTURE(CBT) (USd/bu.)
719.250
60.000
9.10
10/08
WHEAT FUTURE(KCB) (USd/bu.)
758.500
59.000
8.43
10/08
Look at wheat, corn and soybeans. Planet Bernanke gives the gift of food riots. At the same time, all these markets look like they are blowing- off. Stocks on Thursday, for instance. I'm not going to run out and buy wheat or gold. Too 'toppy'. EDIT: Sharon Astyk is giving the crowd the willies by describing the non-linearities present in agriculture. The issue is whether there will be enough farmers, water or (obviously) fuel to allow us to be fed. The outlook is iffy, according to Sharon. It is the farmers - Sharon and Rick Munroe - who ring the loudest alarm bell. Our food supply depends absolutely on available fuel at an affordable price. No farm profit has the same outcome as no business profit. Here, bankruptcy equals catastrophe. EDIT: First of all I must give heartfelt thanks to all my readers and supporters who give me a sense of responsibility and motivate me to do a better job and improve the quality of my content. Thanks to Lynn Harding, jb, Brian Hayes, Gregor MacDonald, Kurt Cobb, Nicole Foss, Andre Angelantoni, Gail Tverberg, Alex Ac, and the rest. Second, it is becoming more clear how unprepared the entire country is for what is unfolding under our noses. It's easy for me to sit back here and say, "learn something." What, exactly are we to learn? What is a bit disconcerting is listening to the peak oil experts coming up to the ends of their presentations and coming up short. What next? We all - all not necessarily being inclusive - want to be farmers ... but don't know how! The learning curve on this and all else is too steep for too short a time. There are no easy answers ... there are few hard answers, either. What is the most reassurance that anyone can give is that the finance universe has the greatest troubles and events will manifest themselves in finance, first. From now 'til then, find out what you yourselves like that others may like as well. I am firmly convinced that the key to success lies from now on not with 'rugged' or any other kind of individualism but within the firm hold of others. Keep others happy and you will be pleased to join them. It's a better - and easier - skill than sewing on buttons. .

Indigenous Farming Methods

SUBHEAD: Mitigating the effects of climate change while boosting food production.

By Mel Landers on 5 October 2010 in Nourishing The Planet
(http://blogs.worldwatch.org/nourishingtheplanet/indigenous-farming-methods-mitigating-the-effects-of-climate-change-while-boosting-food-production)


Image above: Diorama of Iroquois practicing the "Three Sisters" technique of growing squash, beans and corn in mounds. From (http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/IroquoisVillage/sistersone.html).  

Hydraulic Engineering
Spanish conquistadors had great respect for the crops developed by the indigenous farmers of the Americas. A full 60 percent of the food these foreigners ate every day originated in the region. But the conquistadors failed to appreciate the importance of the production methods used by those innovative local farmers.

Indigenous American crops were introduced in colonies around the world. But the farmers’ innovative production methods were shunned and, for the most part, lost to the world for 500 years. Serious efforts to rediscover these methods have only begun during the last few decades.
Sophisticated hydraulic engineering projects can be found, on a massive scale, in the Andes Mountains and along the Pacific Coast of South America, developed by people who had no metal tools. Using only simple devices and their own manual labor, these farmers built thousands of hectares of terraces in the mountains and thousands of giant water-trapping depressions (Qochas) in the high plateaus.

In Bolivia’s Altiplano, hundreds of square kilometers are covered by raised farming platforms (Waru Waru), causeways, canals, and manmade islands in an area that resembles a lake for half the year and is completely dry for the rest of the year. All this, as well, was built by hand.

Much of ancient Mexico City was built over a lake, on which the Aztecs built thousands of floating platforms (Chinampas) on which to grow their crops. Other farmers directed rainfall into spiraling holes that led to underground storage chambers. And many indigenous cultures constructed irrigation canals.

Land Improvement
The practice shared by all these farming societies was their use of raised beds, covered with thick layers of organic matter, or mulch. It appears that indigenous populations built such systems throughout the Americas. It was arguably their most important method of coping with the climate variability caused by the El Niño/La Niña cycle. The Permaculture Research Institute of Australia has proven the value of this type of system by creating a lush raised-bed garden in the Jordanian desert.

Raised beds, when tied together with ridges every few meters, can retain 100 percent of the rain that falls on the field, compared with less than 10 percent infiltration in a flat, ploughed field. During a drought, it is important to maintain the highest soil moisture content possible.

During periods of excess rain, the beds hold part of the root system up in well-oxygenated soil, above the level of the standing water. This prevents anaerobic decomposition of roots and helps guarantee at least some production. Unlike today, there was no “food aid” available to ancient indigenous peoples.

The raised structures were of variable lengths, but most were about a meter wide. If not formed on elevated platforms or terraces, they were commonly built on the contour to hold water and prevent erosion. When built in depressions, however, they radiated to the center. Crops were planted on the beds as the retained water receded.

The organic mulch shaded the soil, keeping it cool and moist. It also prevented raindrops from eroding the soil surface. As the organic matter decomposed, it provided food for earthworms and myriad other beneficial micro-organisms. Earthworms help aerate and fertilize the soil. A permanent mulch also created the proper environment for mycorrhizal fungi, which help ensure that plants receive nutrients and pest protection.

Soil Improvement
Heavy rains in the Amazon River Basin severely leach nutrients from the soil, leaving the native soils useless for agricultural production soon after forest is removed. Yet the first conquistadors to enter the Amazon Basin described their encounters with great agricultural societies, living in large cities that endured until European diseases devastated their populations.

These cities were made possible by soil improvement techniques that have only partially survived in a few remote communities of indigenous farmers. For 2,000 years, famers in the rivers of the Amazon Basin were producing fertile soil on which to grow their crops, where no such soil had existed before.

These soils, known as “black earth,” are still fertile 500 years after they were last made. They contain high concentrations of humus, powdered charcoal, and pieces of broken pottery. Although they are located high above the river levels, they contain aquatic plant remains and sand. The sand indicates that the people scooped up the river muck in the dry season and spread it over their beds.

The pottery chards provide soil structure where no natural rock exists. The charcoal (potentially stable for thousands of years) provides a long-term depository for nutrients, buffers the pH of the soil, and mitigates the toxic effects of aluminum in the soil. The humus (potentially stable for hundreds of years) is like a sponge for nutrients and moisture.

These soils cannot be reproduced simply by adding charred material. The humus is vitally important to the functioning of these soils. Fortunately, there are ways to produce large amounts of humus to recreate these super-fertile soils. Developing these soils today would contribute greatly to efforts to feed a world full of hungry people.

Putting These Methods into Perspective
The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in its 2007 assessment, suggests the use of ancient indigenous technologies from the Americas as a means of mitigating the effects of climate change. Evidence indicates that global warming is increasing the frequency and severity of both droughts and inundations.

These ancient agricultural technologies hold promise for increasing food production worldwide. With nearly a billion people suffering from chronic hunger, the time is overdue for another agricultural revolution. The introduction of indigenous American crops 500 years ago started one. The introduction of their innovative production methods could start another.

Mel Landers is an agronomist working with farmers in Nicaragua.

See also:
Hawaii Agriculture Notes - Biochar



.

Argentina's Roundup human tragedy

SUBHEAD: How long will it take for Kauai to wake up? GMO crops are not good for the land or it's people.

  
Image above: A Russian study rats fed GM soy bore smaller pups than control group. From (http://www.regnum.ru/english/526651.html).  

By Dario Aranda on 6 October 2010 for GMwatch - (http://gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/12548-roundup-argentinas-human-tragedy)
• Ten years of GM soy and glyphosate poisoning have escalated the rates of cancer and birth defects. • GM soy a death sentence for humans and the environment
GM soy a death sentence for humans and the environment Argentina has become a giant experiment in farming genetically modified (GM) Roundup Ready (RR) soy, engineered to be tolerant to Roundup, Monsanto’s formulation of the herbicide glyphosate. The Argentine government, eager to pull the country out of a deep economic recession in the 1990s, restructured its economy around GM soy grown for export, most of which goes to feed livestock in Europe.

In 2009, GM soy was planted on 19 million hectares - over half of Argentina’s cultivated land - and sprayed with 200 million litres of glyphosate herbicide [1]. Spraying is often carried out from the air, causing problems of drift. In 2002, two years after the first big harvests of RR soy in the country, residents and doctors in soy producing areas began reporting serious health effects from glyphosate spraying, including high rates of birth defects as well as infertility, stillbirths, miscarriages, and cancers [2].

Environmental effects include killed food crops and livestock and streams strewn with dead fish [2, 3]. One of the first medical doctors to report problems from glyphosate spraying of GM soy was Dr Darío Gianfelici, from Cerrito, Entre Ríos, Argentina. According to Gianfelici, there are two levels of toxic effects from glyphosate: acute effects, such as vomiting, diarrhoea, respiratory problems, and skin rashes; and chronic effects, which take 10–20 years to show up. These include infertility and cancer [4]. Gianfelici said [4]:

“Our town experienced drastic changes before and after soy. I’ve seen people die from cancer at age 30. I have witnessed pregnancy problems and a significant increase in fertility problems. I have seen an increase in respiratory diseases, as has never been seen before. “GM soy has been a death sentence for humans and for the environment. No money can compensate for the damage that has been caused – the contamination, the deaths, the cases of cancer and malformations.”  

Scientists corroborate birth defects & threatened by organised mob
Reports of birth defects in glyphosate-sprayed areas of Argentina gained scientific credibility in 2009, when senior Argentine government scientist Prof. Andrés Carrasco went public with his research findings, fully published a year later [1], that glyphosate causes malformations in frog and chicken embryos at doses far lower than those used in agricultural spraying (see [5] Lab Study Establishes Glyphosate Link to Birth Defects, SiS 48).

“The findings in the lab are compatible with malformations observed in humans exposed to glyphosate during pregnancy,” said Carrasco [6], “I suspect the toxicity classification of glyphosate is too low ... in some cases this can be a powerful poison.”

At a recent conference, Carrasco, professor and director of the Laboratory of Molecular Embryology, University of Buenos Aires Medical School and lead researcher of the National Council of Scientific and Technical Research (CONICET), said a frequent result of malformations in human embryos is miscarriage. He said that it was now not unusual for women in GM soy producing regions of Argentina to have up to five miscarriages in a row [7].

The research findings of Carrasco and his colleagues were not welcomed by some sectors of government and industry. After he announced them, four people from Argentina’s crop protection trade association CASAFE were sent to try to search his laboratory and he was “seriously told off” by Lino Barrañao, Argentina’s science and technology minister [6].

Things took a violent turn in 2010, when an organized mob of thugs attacked people who gathered to hear Carrasco talk in La Leonesa, an agricultural town that has become a centre for activism against agrochemical spraying of soy and rice crops. Three people were seriously injured. Carrasco and a colleague shut themselves in a car and were surrounded by people making violent threats and beating the car for two hours [8]. Witnesses said the attack was organized by local officials and a local rice producer to protect the economic interests behind local agro-industry. Amnesty International has called for an investigation.

 Revolutionary ruling ban agrochemical sprays
Based on Carrasco’s findings and other reports of health problems from spraying, the Environmental Lawyers Association of Argentina petitioned the Supreme Court of Argentina to ban the use of glyphosate (see [9] Glyphosate Herbicide Could Cause Birth Defects, SiS 43).

But such is Argentina’s dependence on the GM soy farming model that Guillermo Cal, executive director of CASAFE, said [6] a ban would mean “we couldn’t do agriculture in Argentina”. In addition, the cash-strapped Argentine government relies heavily on tariffs levied on soy exports and is protective of the industry. No national ban on glyphosate has yet been implemented.

But in March 2010, just months after the release of Carrasco’s findings, a lawsuit brought by sprayed residents resulted in a regional court banning the spraying of agrochemicals near populated areas of Santa Fe province [10]. The ruling was revolutionary in that it implemented the precautionary principle and reversed the burden of proof [11].

No longer do residents have to prove that agrochemical spraying causes harm, but the government and soy producers have to prove it is safe. Viviana Peralta, a housewife, instigated the lawsuit. She and her family were hospitalized following aerial spraying near her home. Her newborn baby had turned blue and Peralta herself suffered respiratory problems. Peralta said, “When I saw my baby like that, I said [11], “Enough. This cannot go on.” ”

State commission reports birth defects up fourfold in ten years
Shortly after the residents’ court victory, a commission of the provincial government of Chaco state reported that between 2000 and 2009, the rate of childhood cancers tripled in La Leonesa and the birth defects increased nearly fourfold over the entire province [12].

These staggering rises in disease coincided with the expansion of the agricultural frontier into Chaco province and the resulting rise in agrochemical use. The commission identified the main problem as glyphosate and other agrochemicals applied to “transgenic crops, which require aerial and ground spraying (dusting) with agrochemicals”.

A member of the Chaco commission, who did not want to be identified due to the “tremendous pressures” they were under, said [13], “all those who signed the report are very experienced in the subject under study, but rice and soy planters are strongly pressuring the government. We don’t know how this will end, as there are many interests involved.”

 Embryonic defects at well below legal exposure levels
Speaking at a conference, Carrasco noted the irony that Argentina’s people are suffering from the production of a commodity (GM soy) destined for Europe, which European consumers do not want [7].

Europe imports around 38 million tonnes of soy per year [14], much of which is GM soy sprayed with glyphosate. Because of consumer resistance to GM, most of it ends up hidden in animal feed. Carrasco found malformations in frog and chicken embryos injected with 2.03 mg/kg glyphosate – nearly ten times lower than the maximum residue limit (MRL) for glyphosate allowed in soy in the EU (20 mg/kg) [15]. Soybeans have been found to contain glyphosate residues at levels up to 17mg/kg [16].

Defenders of glyphosate may say that these figures do not show a risk to consumers, because embryos are designed to keep toxins out. However, studies show that the added ingredients (adjuvants) in Roundup make cell membranes more permeable to glyphosate, increasing its toxicity to cells [17, 18]. Even without soy, glyphosate is all around us.

Apart from its use in agriculture, Roundup is marketed to home gardeners as safe to use around children and pets. It is sprayed on schoolyards and verges by local authorities. The myth of Roundup’s safety persists despite two court rulings forcing Monsanto to withdraw advertising claims that Roundup is biodegradable and environmentally friendly [19, 20].  

Long list of peer-reviewed studies document glyphosate toxicities
In reality, the research of Carrasco’s team is the latest in a long list of peer-reviewed studies showing dangers to health and the environment from glyphosate. Many of these studies are collected in a new report co-authored by nine international scientists [21], “GM Soy: Sustainable? Responsible”.

The report challenges claims of sustainability for GM soy and the glyphosate herbicide on which it relies. Published by GLS Bank, Germany and ARGE Gentechnik-frei, Austria’s GM-free industry association, the report has been released together with the powerful testimonies of Argentine people affected by glyphosate spraying on GM soy [22].

 Carrasco remains humble about his study, saying [11], “The origin of my work is my contact with the communities victimized by agrochemical use. They are the irrefutable proof of my research.” So the final word on the claimed safety of glyphosate and other agrochemicals sprayed on GM soy must go to Peralta.

She said [11]: “I do not know about chemistry, I did not go to university, but I know what my whole family has suffered. To people who are not familiar with this model of agriculture, I say: Do not trust these companies. Reject agrochemicals. Do it for the life of your children.”  

References

1. Paganelli A, Gnazzo V, Acosta H, Lopez SL and Carrasco AD. Glyphosate-based herbicides produce teratogenic effects on vertebrates by impairing retinoic acid signalling. Chem Res Toxicol, August 9. http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx1001749

 2. Gianfelici, D.R. 2009. La Soja, La Salud y La Gente. http://zatega.net/zats/libro-quotla-soja-la-salud-y-la-gente-quot-dr-dario-gianfelici-27052.htm

3. Branford, S. 2004. Argentina’s Bitter Harvest. New Scientist, April 17, 40-43. http://www.grain.org/research/contamination.cfm?id=95

 4. Dr Darío Gianfelici, Interview by Darío Aranda, August 2010. http://www.gmwatch.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12484:reports-dario-gianfelici-interview

5. Ho MW. Lab study establishes link to birth defects. Science in Society 48 (to appear).

6. Webber, J., Weitzman, H. 2009. Argentina pressed to ban crop chemical after health concerns. Financial Times, May 29. http://www.gene.ch/genet/2009/Jun/msg00006.html

7. Prof. Andrés Carrasco, speaking at the GMO-Free Regions Conference at the European Parliament, Brussels (September 16–18, 2010)

8. Amnesty International. 2010. Argentina: Threats deny community access to research. 12 August 2010. http://bit.ly/cJsqUR

9. Ho MW. Glyphosate herbicide could cause birth defects. Science in Society 43, 36, 2009.

10. Romig, S. 2010. Argentina court blocks agrochemical spraying near rural town. Dow Jones Newswires, March 17. http://bit.ly/cg2AgG

11. Dario Aranda, Interview with Viviana Peralta, instigator of the lawsuit, August 2010. http://www.gmwatch.eu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12486:reports-viviana-peralta-interview

12. Comision Provincial de Investigación de Contaminantes del Agua. 2010. Primer informe. Resistencia, Chaco. April. Report available in original Spanish: http://www.gmwatch.eu/files/Chaco_Government_Report_Spanish.pdf or in English translation: http://www.gmwatch.eu/files/Chaco_Government_Report_English.pdf

13. Aranda, D. 2010. La salud no es lo primero en el modelo agroindustrial. Pagina12, June 14. http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/1-147561-2010-06-14.html

14. Cert ID. Cert ID Certified ‘Non-GMO’ Soy Meal and Other Soy Products: Volumes Available from South America. Porto Alegre, Brazil, July 14, 2008.

15. Pesticide residues in food – 1997: Report. Report of the Joint Meeting of the FAO Panel of Experts on Pesticide Residues in Food and the Environment and the WHO Core Assessment Group on Pesticide Residues. Lyons, France, 22 September – 1 October 1997. http://www.fao.org/docrep/w8141e/w8141e0u.htm

16. Pesticide residues in food – 2005. Report of the Joint Meeting of the FAO Panel of Experts on Pesticide Residues in Food and the Environment and the WHO Core Assessment Group on Pesticide Residues, Geneva, Switzerland, 20–29 September. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper 183, 7.

17. Haefs R, Schmitz-Eiberger M, Mainx HG, Mittelstaedt W, Noga G. Studies on a new group of biodegradable surfactants for glyphosate. Pest Manag. Sci. 2002. 58, 825–33.

18. Marc J, Mulner-Lorillon O, Boulben S, Hureau D, Durand G, Bellé R. Pesticide Roundup provokes cell division dysfunction at the level of CDK1/cyclin B activation. Chem Res Toxicol. 2002, 15, 326–31.

19. Attorney General of the State of New York, Consumer Frauds and Protection Bureau, Environmental Protection Bureau. 1996. In the matter of Monsanto Company, respondent. Assurance of discontinuance pursuant to executive law §63(15). New York, NY, Nov. False advertising by Monsanto regarding the safety of Roundup herbicide (glyphosate). http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/Monsanto-v-AGNYnov96.htm

20. Monsanto fined in France for “false” herbicide ads. Agence France Presse, 26 Jan 2007. http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_4114.cfm

21. Antoniou M., Brack P, Carrasco, A., Fagan, J., Habib, M., Kageyama, P., Leifert, C., Nodari, R., Pengue, W. 2010. GM Soy: Sustainable? Responsible? GLS Gemeinschaftsbank and ARGE Gentechnik-frei. Download full report and summary from: http://bit.ly/9D9J2k. At the time of writing, the full report is available in English or Portuguese, but will soon be available in French, German, and Spanish translations.

22. Interviews with Argentine people affected by glyphosate spraying, conducted in August 2010 by journalist Dario Aranda, are available here: http://www.gmwatch.org/component/content/article/12479-reports-reports

 

In shade of Kapahi PV panels

SUBHEAD: Speculative development on agland hidden under PR about solar energy proposal. Image above: Suburban sprawl Google Earth view of suburban sprawl on Wilhelmina Rise overlooking Waikiki and Diamond Head. Selected by Juan Wilson. [Editor's note: Great! Solar PV farm. Not so great - at the cost of more suburban sprawl on Kauai. The new language of the spec-development crowd is to make less obvious their interest in making a quick buck by slathering on terms like "sustainability", "green-jobs", "walkable communities" and "smart-growth". This particular scheme involves Ron Agor planning a 150 acre conversion of agland to suburban sprawl in an undeveloped area of Kapaa.] By Leo Azambuja on 8 October 2010 in The Garden Island News - (http://thegardenisland.com/news/local/article_92f28de4-d2ae-11df-904d-001cc4c002e0.html) The Kaua‘i Planning Commission approved on Sept. 28 what could become the largest solar-energy facility in the state.

In order to qualify for grants that could potentially cut construction costs in half, the solar company plans to finish the project by the end of the year.

“We think it’s a step forward in balancing the energy needs of the island, and a small step toward self-sufficiency,” said attorney Kurt Bosshard, president and sole member of Kapa‘a Solar LLC.

Drew Bradley, regional manager at REC Solar, the company contracted to install the solar structures, said the project will be larger than the one on Lana‘i.

“It’s a great chance for Kaua‘i to step out front with renewable energy,” he said. “It’s hard to imagine any opposition to a project like this.”

Bradley said the project will bring employment and money, besides being “great for the environment.”

The solar farm is planned to occupy four acres of a 165-acre property by Olohena Road, “just bellow the Ka‘apuni (Road) intersection,” Bosshard said.

If Kapa‘a Solar finishes the project by the end of the year, by law the company could qualify for a reimbursement of 50 percent of the construction costs said Bosshard.

“The project itself would generate millions of dollars in state and federal contributions,” he said.

This would allow Kaua‘i Island Utility Cooperative to purchase power from the facility at a reasonable rate, Bosshard said.

“We are actually ready to start should you approve this,” Bosshard said at the commission meeting.

Many REC workers showed up at the meeting to testify on behalf of the company, praising the company for taking care of them while off work, and saying they are eager and ready to go back to work.

Moloka‘i native Nathan Canyon, who has been on Kaua‘i for over two years working for REC, said he wants to see the island’s children benefiting from the project.

Location

Project architect Ron Agor said in the application that the area where the project is scheduled to be built is known as Kapa‘a Highlands.

Phase One of Kapa‘a Highlands is a 64-acre agriculture subdivision, and Phase Two is a 97-acre housing project with an affordable component, states the application.

Phase Two, located at the northwest corner of the Kapa‘a bypass road and Olohena Road, is in the process of a state Land Use Commission application to be re-zoned to urban from agriculture.

The land on phase two, states the application, is designated as urban center in the county’s General Plan.

The solar farm’s proposed location is near KIUC’s transmission lines, which makes the proposal “attractive to KIUC,” Agor says in the application.

“The purchase-power agreement between KIUC and Kapa‘a Highlands is currently being worked on,” the application reads.

Solar farm

The solar panels, mounted on posts and piers, will cover nearly the entire four-acre site. The panels average five to 12 feet off the ground, and will be mounted on a gentle slope from east to west, in an area not visible from Kuhio Highway or the bypass road.

The land where the panels will be mounted is zoned agriculture by the county and state, despite being fallow for approximately 15 years, when decades of sugar cultivation there ceased.

The soil is primarily silty clay, with a moderately rapid permeability, slow run-off and low erosion hazard. The U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service classifies the soil productivity as B, D and E. The classification system has a scale from A to E, with A being the most productive.

REC on Kaua‘i

The company in charge of the design and installation of the solar panels, REC Solar, has several plants spread throughout Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawai‘i, Oregon and New Jersey, according to the company’s website.

In Hawai‘i, REC has solar plants on O‘ahu, the Big Island and Kaua‘i. On the Garden Island REC has installed panels at Costco, Kukui Grove Center’s Longs Drug Stores and Waimea’s Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc.

.

Lurching Toward Gomorrah

SUBHEAD: Finance is a taxing agent. It's relationship to commerce has changed to being purely parasitic. Image above: Etching by John Martin (1732) of Lot leaving the "The Destruction of Sodem and Gomorrah". From (http://www.williamweston.co.uk/pages/previous/single/822/276/1.html). By Steve Ludlum on 6 October 2010 in Economic Undertow - (http://economic-undertow.blogspot.com/2010/10/lurching-tiward-gomorrah.html) The world is under a lot of stress. Things aren't working. Everyone I know is having problems. Some are losing their jobs, their houses or have lost retirement savings. People looking to sell their houses cannot. Business activities are frozen. Banks aren't lending ... because there are few borrowers and those looking for loans cannot qualify.
A time- tested approach to dealing with systemic issues is to unleash the creativity and wit of individuals. A lot of talk by the establishment indicates it wants individual entrepreneurs to 'innovate' the country out of its malaise. Sounds good except the greatest obstacle to innovation is ... the government itself. It's hard to make progress when the government and its 'agencies' are actively pushing back! How can those nearing retirement save when 'safe' returns - interest on savings - are near zero? How can anyone buy or sell a house when the industry is rife with fraud from top to bottom, promoted and abetted by government? How can a young person enjoy a secure future when such a future requires passage though institutional gateways that saddle that person with unserviceable, unsupportable debts? How can the country adjust away from energy waste when waste is a structural component? When destinations are spread across the countryside, when replacing them cannot be contemplated due to sunk costs, resistance to the creation of alternatives and a decline in capital? How can change be accomplished when those most able to take the required steps - the young, bright and ambitious - are frozen into stasis by establishment prejudices, institutional favoritism toward a few central industries and a culture that has lost curiosity? If work, skill, labor and sensible capital investment is deprecated, what's left? If workers cannot get good jobs - the platform by which workers- as actors exhibit their skills and accumulated experience, what can Companies accomplish? Workers are companies' customers. If companies cannot find customers, what allows them to earn profits? If companies cannot profit, who hires the unemployed, who allows both workers and companies to accumulate capital? How can capital be accumulated when there are no returns/yields on savings? Without employment, customers, profits and capital accumulation, how does anyone/anything complete the virtuous cycle?
The decline in 'real commerce' leaves only speculation in various pseudo- 'Markets', which is what the various nations' central banks are offering as a substitute for hard work, innovation and risk taking. Welcome to the casino, where there is only the risk. In these markets the first and only question is, "What position in this market is the government taking?" Says Charles Hugh-Smith:
If we wanted to increase the odds of financial/economic collapse to 95%, we would need to assemble the following ingredients: Concentrate central-planning power in non-transparent State and quasi-State agencies. Placing the levers of central planning in a few hands who are unbound by pubic scrutiny greatly increases the odds of catastrophic policy mistakes being made, and guarantees that those policy mistakes will be pursued with bull-headed determination until collapse occurs.
Says Ilargi at Automatic Earth:
And talking about "would you buy stocks in the face of this data", for a preview of next time: we're fast on our way back to what "we" were 60-70 years ago, when there were 90%+ less "investors" relative to the total population than there are today. Talk about a dying breed. Banks are not the only zombies in our economies. We're all zombies. All our wealth has evaporated, and we're just not clueing in. Pension fund? Gimme a break. Value of your home? Get real. Indispensable at your job? Let's not go there. Look at the graphs for a while, and see you next time.
Graph, you ask? This is from the Consumer Metrics Institute. A 'contraction watch'. How apt! We have two recessions at once, there could in reality be more, many more. We are a Planet Bernanke blunder away from a fuel price spike that gains a life of its own, rampaging across the economic landscape like a golem. If $88 oil isn't enough to pull the plug on 'recovery', imagine what $140 oil will do. Says Matt Savinar:
In October 2005, the normally conservative London Times acknowledged that the world's wealth may soon evaporate as we enter a technological and economic "Dark Age." In an article entitled "Waiting for the Lights to Go Out" Times columnist Bryan Appleyard reported: Oil is running out; the climate is changing at a potentially catastrophic rate; wars over scarce resources are brewing; finally, most shocking of all, we don't seem to be having enough ideas about how to fix any of these things. Almost daily, new evidence is emerging that progress can no longer be taken for granted, that a new Dark Age is lying in wait for ourselves and our children . . . growth may be coming to an end. Since our entire financial order from interest rates, pension funds, insurance, to stock markets is predicated on growth, the social and economic consequences may be cataclysmic.
Since cataclysms seem to be a faltering 'Key Man' away, why do people who should know better insist that Peak Oil is somewhere 'off in the future'? How bad does it have to get, anyway? Even though finance itself does not require energy the same way the trucking or airline industry does, it needs the business activity that takes place in the physical economy. Finance is a taxing agent. It's relationship to commerce - once essential for allocating capital - has changed to being purely parasitic. Finance has both co-opted and out-competed the government as the taxing agent. Government responds by offering money at near-zero cost and lending to the government, itself. Finance is the gatekeeper, hoarding the low-cost money. By doing so the value of commerce declines, that of money increases and the problems increase. A contest for relevance is taking place. This contest is between central banks and governments on one hand with finance on the other. The citizens are frozen out of the contest and can only lose. .