View allAll Photos Tagged Inaction
Much is to be seen but little is actually happening in this scene at Worcester Shrub Hill. To the left 4680, a long time Worcester based loco, is gently sizzling behind a smart green Class 121 of 122 which will depart for Great Malvern. Standing on the centre road is Hymek D7035, the driver, still wearing his steam age 'grease top' hat, is aboard, it will work a Worcester to Paddington train. Behind the Hymek is a class 116 DMU.
In the distance a view of 85A Worcester Loco Depot can be had, at this time it is crammed with steam locomotives, visible on the platform are trainspotters, books in hand hoping for a 'cop', they are sitting on a couple of the sturdy luggage trolleys which provided the required seating for generations of train spotters even if the raised lip did cut of the blood supply to the legs. Lastly a lady with shopping bags strolls without concern across the tracks, probably to catch the Great Malvern train.
4680 was a Collett 57xx class pannier tank, it was built 30/06/1944 and withdrawn December 1965. The loco was cut at Cashmore's (Newport) 06/1966.
D7035 was a Beyer-Peacock Hymek, it entered traffic 04/06/1962, it was withdrawn 01/01/1972 and cut at Swindon Works.
Peter Shoesmith 19/05/1964.
Copyright Geoff Dowling & John Whitehouse: All rights reserved
EXPLORED as well (wow 6 in a row). Thank you.
The young division. "www.claudiaveja.com"
Model's name Stephie
Model's name: Emm
None of the photo equipment brands available are perfect. There is still a long way to go and I find that Hasselblad, Nikon, Canon, Leica , Sigma, Pentax or you name it all have something great about them and not so great stuff as well. If these brands would merge their knowledge and efforts the outcome would be fascinating I'm sure but it's an utopia off course.
Any way after all it is not about the brand of the camera a photographer is holding but about the photographer holding it. See another hunting scene
strobist:
- on camera strobe bounced up in softbox (LumiQuest Softbox III - which is quite heavy. A middle version between what the one Emm and Stephie have it would be about right)
- off camera strobe with diffuser (LumiQuest UltraBounce)
- triggered with pocket wizards
JCB FASTRAC 4160 tractor with KRONE Swadro 1400 Plus four-rotor swather
You can follow us:
A placard seen on Westminster Bridge during a rally on Saturday 6 November against austerity, and also for climate and social justice. There were also demands to tax the super-rich and not the poor. The protest was organised by a coalition of progressive civil society activists, led by the People's Assembly, but also including Just Stop Oil, UNITE and Extinction Rebellion.
This image is inspired by one of my favorite photographers - Manuel Libres Librodo Jr. who is a master of natural light ...
Any feedback for improvement greatly appreciated. Thanks.
You can follow us:
What began as a protest by the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg, who decided to skip school on Fridays to draw attention to the plight of the planet, has turned into the biggest mass demonstration in history. Millions of people have marched in the streets in 150 countries from Australia to Iceland to protest about global warming. The demonstrations have been led by young people inspired by Greta Thunberg, but have been attended by all ages.
Not surprisingly US President Donald Trump has said he will not attend the upcoming UN Climate Summit, and equally as unsurprising Australia has been denied a speaking role because of our Governments shameful record of opening new fossil fuel mines like Adani and inaction on other climate change matters.
These images from the Melbourne event where 100,000+ people gathered and marched.
Elleboogkerk, Amersfoort: Web - 01.02.2025 — 04.05.2025
Especially for this unique location, Hatoum created the installation Web (2025), a large-scale constellation of delicate, transparent glass spheres connected by steel wires, forming a spider's web. The seemingly precarious web, which hangs overhead and stretches almost across the entire space, is both fascinating and ominous.
Web can be seen as a net descending from above, heralding an oppressive, threatening confinement, but can simultaneously be experienced as a "home" or a place of safety. This reminds us that spiders spin their webs to capture and ensnare their prey. For Hatoum, the web also symbolizes the interconnectedness of things. The glass spheres sparkle like dewdrops on the web, which is paradoxically both seductive and terrifying. Web is a stark yet poetic reminder of the physically and psychologically constricting "webs" we must navigate in life. Hatoum has used the web motif, in various materials, throughout her oeuvre to explore themes of neglect, inaction, mobility, and control.
RTW: Einsatz bei akuten Notfällen, da er eine notfallmedizinische Erstversorgung und einen Transport in eine spezialisierte Klinik ermöglicht.
Personal:
In der Regel mit einem Notfallsanitäter besetzt, der die höchste Qualifikation im Rettungsdienst hat.
Hier drei Personen angefordert.
Der Hauptunterschied zwischen einem Rettungswagen (RTW) und einem Krankentransportwagen (KTW) liegt in ihrem Einsatzzweck: Der RTW ist für medizinische Notfälle konzipiert und verfügt über eine umfangreiche Notfallausstattung,
während der KTW für den Transport von nicht akuten, aber transportbedürftigen Patienten eingesetzt wird.
RTWs sind mit hochqualifiziertem Personal (Notfallsanitäter) und Geräten wie EKG, Defibrillator und Beatmungsgeräten ausgestattet,
während KTWs eine Grundausstattung für den Transport von Patienten haben, die eine medizinische Begleitung, aber keine akute Notfallversorgung benötigen.
FENDT 722 Vario 'Profi Plus' Tannengrün with the PÖTTINGER NOVACAT disc mowers
You can follow us:
This brave woman was one of several people arrested in Trafalgar Square for daring to peacefully resist the government's inaction on the climate and cost of living crisis. She had been participating in a "Just Stop Oil" demo, by sitting on the road, on the south side of the square and had been holding a placard declaring "We will not pay for greed."
Another activist explained his own interpretation of the placard - "We refuse to go hungry to feed your profits, we refuse to sacrifice our planet on the altar of greed."
This and other similar protests occur as a tiny corporate minority are profiteering from the surge in the oil price, inflicting misery on working families, and while also benefiting the government's backing for new oil fields.
The UK's mainstream TV network Sky News network reported in August 2022 that "the country has seen a huge spike in the number of people becoming billionaires." - Yes, that's right, a "huge spike" in the middle of the UK's longest decline in working families' living standards in 200 years.
news.sky.com/story/sunday-times-rich-list-2022-uk-has-a-r...
The UK government claims that it doesn't have enough funds to support the NHS, the disabled, the homeless or working families who can't afford to heat their homes. It also explains its inability to take any of the steps desperately needed to avert catastrophic climate change, due to the supposed cost.
All the while it allows UK oil companies to profit from the Ukraine War by setting the maximum possible market price thereby plunging ordinary families into poverty. It also continues to allow individuals and corporations to hide their wealth in tax havens, hands out billions by propping up, via the Bank of England's open market operations, the assets of wealthy bond holders and it still privileges multinationals with the lowest corporation tax, by a significant margin, in the G7, and also in the G20.
According to the Just Stop Oil website, just a few days prior to when this photo was taken, a spokesperson for the activist group set out their demands -
“Rishi Sunak is about to U-turn on attending COP27. We demand that he also U-turn on new oil and gas. This genocidal policy will kill millions of people, while failing to address the worst cost of living crisis this country has ever seen.
“It's time for a serious windfall tax on big oil, without the get-out-of-jail-free tax credits that will encourage more oil and gas that we cannot afford. Vulnerable people will be freezing to death in their homes this winter, unable to afford a can of soup, while his government refuses to tax the rich and the big energy companies that are profiting from our misery.
“We owe it to our young people to stop fossil fuels, we owe it to our workers to create a just transition to a zero-carbon economy, we owe it to our old people to enable them to live with dignity. We are not prepared to stand by and watch while everything we love is destroyed."
juststopoil.org/2022/11/01/day-32-just-stop-oil-target-do...
PRESIDENT OBAMA: President Hollande, Mr. Secretary General, fellow leaders. We have come to Paris to show our resolve. We offer our condolences to the people of France for the barbaric attacks on this beautiful city. We stand united in solidarity not only to deliver justice to the terrorist network responsible for those attacks but to protect our people and uphold the enduring values that keep us strong and keep us free. And we salute the people of Paris for insisting this crucial conference go on -- an act of defiance that proves nothing will deter us from building the future we want for our children. What greater rejection of those who would tear down our world than marshaling our best efforts to save it? Nearly 200 nations have assembled here this week -- a declaration that for all the challenges we face, the growing threat of climate change could define the contours of this century more dramatically than any other. What should give us hope that this is a turning point, that this is the moment we finally determined we would save our planet, is the fact that our nations share a sense of urgency about this challenge and a growing realization that it is within our power to do something about it.Our understanding of the ways human beings disrupt the climate advances by the day. Fourteen of the fifteen warmest years on record have occurred since the year 2000 -- and 2015 is on pace to be the warmest year of all. No nation -- large or small, wealthy or poor -- is immune to what this means. This summer, I saw the effects of climate change firsthand in our northernmost state, Alaska, where the sea is already swallowing villages and eroding shorelines; where permafrost thaws and the tundra burns; where glaciers are melting at a pace unprecedented in modern times. And it was a preview of one possible future -- a glimpse of our children’s fate if the climate keeps changing faster than our efforts to address it. Submerged countries. Abandoned cities. Fields that no longer grow. Political disruptions that trigger new conflict, and even more floods of desperate peoples seeking the sanctuary of nations not their own. That future is not one of strong economies, nor is it one where fragile states can find their footing. That future is one that we have the power to change. Right here. Right now. But only if we rise to this moment. As one of America’s governors has said, “We are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change, and the last generation that can do something about it.”I’ve come here personally, as the leader of the world’s largest economy and the second-largest emitter, to say that the United States of America not only recognizes our role in creating this problem, we embrace our responsibility to do something about it.Over the last seven years, we’ve made ambitious investments in clean energy, and ambitious reductions in our carbon emissions. We’ve multiplied wind power threefold, and solar power more than twentyfold, helping create parts of America where these clean power sources are finally cheaper than dirtier, conventional power. We’ve invested in energy efficiency in every way imaginable. We’ve said no to infrastructure that would pull high-carbon fossil fuels from the ground, and we’ve said yes to the first-ever set of national standards limiting the amount of carbon pollution our power plants can release into the sky.The advances we’ve made have helped drive our economic output to all-time highs, and drive our carbon pollution to its lowest levels in nearly two decades. But the good news is this is not an American trend alone. Last year, the global economy grew while global carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels stayed flat. And what this means can’t be overstated. We have broken the old arguments for inaction. We have proved that strong economic growth and a safer environment no longer have to conflict with one another; they can work in concert with one another.
And that should give us hope. One of the enemies that we'll be fighting at this conference is cynicism, the notion we can't do anything about climate change. Our progress should give us hope during these two weeks -- hope that is rooted in collective action. Earlier this month in Dubai, after years of delay, the world agreed to work together to cut the super-pollutants known as HFCs. That's progress. Already, prior to Paris, more than 180 countries representing nearly 95 percent of global emissions have put forward their own climate targets. That is progress. For our part, America is on track to reach the emissions targets that I set six years ago in Copenhagen -- we will reduce our carbon emissions in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. And that's why, last year, I set a new target: America will reduce our emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels within 10 years from now.So our task here in Paris is to turn these achievements into an enduring framework for human progress -- not a stopgap solution, but a long-term strategy that gives the world confidence in a low-carbon future.Here, in Paris, let’s secure an agreement that builds in ambition, where progress paves the way for regularly updated targets -- targets that are not set for each of us but by each of us, taking into account the differences that each nation is facing. Here in Paris, let’s agree to a strong system of transparency that gives each of us the confidence that all of us are meeting our commitments. And let’s make sure that the countries who don’t yet have the full capacity to report on their targets receive the support that they need. Here in Paris, let’s reaffirm our commitment that resources will be there for countries willing to do their part to skip the dirty phase of development. And I recognize this will not be easy. It will take a commitment to innovation and the capital to continue driving down the cost of clean energy. And that’s why, this afternoon, I’ll join many of you to announce an historic joint effort to accelerate public and private clean energy innovation on a global scale.Here in Paris, let’s also make sure that these resources flow to the countries that need help preparing for the impacts of climate change that we can no longer avoid. We know the truth that many nations have contributed little to climate change but will be the first to feel its most destructive effects. For some, particularly island nations -- whose leaders I’ll meet with tomorrow -- climate change is a threat to their very existence. And that’s why today, in concert with other nations, America confirms our strong and ongoing commitment to the Least Developed Countries Fund. And tomorrow, we’ll pledge new contributions to risk insurance initiatives that help vulnerable populations rebuild stronger after climate-related disasters.And finally, here in Paris, let’s show businesses and investors that the global economy is on a firm path towards a low-carbon future. If we put the right rules and incentives in place, we’ll unleash the creative power of our best scientists and engineers and entrepreneurs to deploy clean energy technologies and the new jobs and new opportunities that they create all around the world. There are hundreds of billions of dollars ready to deploy to countries around the world if they get the signal that we mean business this time. Let’s send that signal.That’s what we seek in these next two weeks. Not simply an agreement to roll back the pollution we put into our skies, but an agreement that helps us lift people from poverty without condemning the next generation to a planet that’s beyond its capacity to repair. Here, in Paris, we can show the world what is possible when we come together, united in common effort and by a common purpose.And let there be no doubt, the next generation is watching what we do. Just over a week ago, I was in Malaysia, where I held a town hall with young people, and the first question I received was from a young Indonesian woman. And it wasn’t about terrorism, it wasn’t about the economy, it wasn’t about human rights. It was about climate change. And she asked whether I was optimistic about what we can achieve here in Paris, and what young people like her could do to help.I want our actions to show her that we’re listening. I want our actions to be big enough to draw on the talents of all our people -- men and women, rich and poor -- I want to show her passionate, idealistic young generation that we care about their future. For I believe, in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that there is such a thing as being too late. And when it comes to climate change, that hour is almost upon us. But if we act here, if we act now, if we place our own short-term interests behind the air that our young people will breathe, and the food that they will eat, and the water that they will drink, and the hopes and dreams that sustain their lives, then we won't be too late for them.And, my fellow leaders, accepting this challenge will not reward us with moments of victory that are clear or quick. Our progress will be measured differently -- in the suffering that is averted, and a planet that's preserved. And that’s what’s always made this so hard. Our generation may not even live to see the full realization of what we do here. But the knowledge that the next generation will be better off for what we do here -- can we imagine a more worthy reward than that? Passing that on to our children and our grandchildren, so that when they look back and they see what we did here in Paris, they can take pride in our achievement. Let that be the common purpose here in Paris. A world that is worthy of our children. A world that is marked not by conflict, but by cooperation; and not by human suffering, but by human progress. A world that’s safer, and more prosperous, and more secure, and more free than the one that we inherited. Let’s get to work. Thank you very much.
www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/11/30/remarks-pr...
Nearly 150 global leaders are gathering in Paris amid tight security for a critical UN climate meeting.The conference, known as COP21, starts on Monday and will try to craft a long-term deal to limit carbon emissions.Observers say that the recent terror attacks on the French capital will increase the chances of a new agreement.Around 40,000 people are expected to participate in the event, which runs until 11 December.The gathering of 147 heads of state and government is set to be far bigger than the 115 or so who came to Copenhagen in 2009, the last time the world came close to agreeing a long term deal on climate change.Rallies call for action.While many leaders including Presidents Obama and Xi Jinping were always set to attend this conference, the recent violent attacks in Paris have encouraged others to come in an expression of solidarity with the French people.Unlike at Copenhagen, the French organisers are bringing the leaders in at the start of the conference rather than waiting for them to come in at the end, a tactic which failed spectacularly in the Danish capital.On Sunday thousands of people took part in demonstrations worldwide to demand they take firm action.Considerable differencesDelegates are in little doubt that the shadow cast over the city by the attacks will enhance the chances of agreement."I believe that it will make a deal more likely, because what I feel from the parties is that they are very eager to move," said Amjad Abdulla from the Maldives, who chairs the Alliance of Small Island States in the negotiations.A former UK government adviser on climate change and now chairman of environmental think tank E3G, Tom Burke, believes that some leaders will push the line that, by tackling rising temperatures, you remove one of the causes of terrorism.One key problem is what form an agreement will take. The US for instance will not sign up to a legally binding deal as there would be little hope of getting it through a Senate dominated by Republicans."We're looking for an agreement that has broad, really full participation," said US lead negotiator Todd Stern at a news briefing earlier this week."We were quite convinced that an agreement that required actually legally binding targets would have many countries unable to participate."Many developing countries fundamentally disagree. As does the European Union."We must translate the momentum we have seen on the road to Paris into an ambitious, operational, legally binding agreement," said EU commissioner Miguel Arias Canete, in a statement.As well as the form there are also many issues with the content.There are a wide range of views on what the long-term goal of the agreement should be.While it will ostensibly come down to keeping temperatures from rising more than 2C above the pre-industrial level, how that will be represented in the text is the subject of much wrangling.Some countries reject the very notion of 2C and say 1.5C must be the standard. Others want to talk about decarbonising the world by the middle or end of this century.For major oil producers the very idea is anathema.While the fact that more than 180 countries have put forward national plans to cut emissions is a major strength of this conference, there are still big questions marks about how to verify those commitments that will actually be carried out."People in the negotiations, people outside the negotiations are going to be looking for the capacity to have trust and confidence in what countries say they are doing," Todd Stern told reporters."[You] can't run the system without that."COP 21 - the 21st session of the Conference of the Parties - will see more than 190 nations gather in Paris to discuss a possible new global agreement on climate change, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions to avoid the threat of dangerous warming due to human activities.While there is some consensus among the parties that the plans will need to be reviewed every five years, there is no question of punitive restrictions if a country doesn't meet its targets.And among the many other issues in dispute, almost inevitably, is money. While rich countries promised they would give $100bn by 2020 to the developing world back in 2009, the cash has been slow in coming. Right now there is no agreement about what happens after 2020.While there is a general air of optimism and a willingness to get a deal done, success isn't guaranteed this time round. Many believe that a country such as India, with close to 300 million people without electricity, will refuse to sign up to a strong agreement that limits future fossil fuel use.If that happens, the whole process could come unstuck, as nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.Tom Burke for one believes that going against the flow will be particularly difficult this time round."I think one of the reasons people will find it hard to hold out at the end will be because of the level of political capital that Obama has invested in climate change, making it clear it is a primary legacy issue for him," he said.
www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34950442
The Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the world as a result of increased CO2 from human activities. This is causing Greenland's ice sheets and glaciers to melt, contributing to sea level rise.On average, global sea level has risen almost 8 inches since 1901, coming from two main sources: rising ocean temperatures that cause water to expand, and melting glaciers and ice sheets which add water to the oceans.The latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded the oceans will continue rising in coming decades, conservatively projecting up to a 3 foot increase in global mean sea level by 2100. Other studies project an even higher sea level rise if we stay near our current emissions path for carbon pollution. In our stories, we explore how sea level rise impacts homes, livelihoods, economies, and families around the world.In just 2012, the ice that melted in Greenland and flowed into the ocean was equivalent to the amount of water flowing over Niagara Falls for 5 straight years.
yearsoflivingdangerously.com/topic/sea-level-rise/
Adapting to Sea Level Rise in the Coastal Zone. Rising sea level settles border dispute.In an unusual example of the effects of global climate change, rising sea levels in the Bay of Bengal have helped resolve a troublesome territorial dispute between two of the world's most populated countries, a leading Indian oceanographer says.Sugata Hazra, the head of oceanography at Kolkata's Jadavpur University, says a flat muddy patch of land known as South Talpatti in Bangladesh and New Moore Island in India has disappeared under the Bay of Bengal. The landmass had been claimed by both countries but Professor Hazra says satellite images prove it has gone.''It is now a submerged landmass, not an island,'' Professor Hazra told the Herald.Sea-level rise caused by climate change was ''surely'' a factor in the island's inundation, Professor Hazra said.''The rate of sea-level rise in this part of the northern Bay of Bengal is definitely attributable to climate change,'' he said.
''There is a close correlation between the rate of sea-level rise and the sea surface temperature.''The island was once about 3.5 kilometres long and three kilometres wide and situated four kilometres from the mouth of the Hariabhanga River, the waterway that marks a stretch of the border between south-western Bangladesh and India.Scientists believe the disputed island was formed following a cyclone in the Bay of Bengal in 1970 and both countries laid claim to the land.
Bilateral negotiations were inconclusive and in 1981 the Indian government sent gunboats to the island and members of its Border Security Forces planted an Indian flag there.
The island was not inhabited but Bangladeshi fishermen were reportedly sighted there frequently during the dry season.
''This is a unique instance of how climate resolves a dispute,'' said Professor Hazra.''It also goes to show how climate can affect all of us beyond geographical boundaries.''The Indian government had once sent ships with guns to guard the island.''Now one will have to think of sending submarines to mount a vigil there.''Professor Hazra said sea-level rise, changes in monsoonal rain patterns which altered river flows and land subsidence were all contributing to the inundation of land in the northern Bay of Bengal.The low-lying delta region that makes up much of Bangladesh and the neighbouring Indian state of West Bengal are acutely vulnerable to climate change.The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts rising sea levels will devour 17 per cent of Bangladesh by 2050, displacing at least 20 million people. More than 155 million people live in the country.The Bangladesh non-governmental organisation Coastal Watch says an average of 11 Bangladeshis are losing their homes to rising waters every hour.Professor Hazra predicts that 15 per cent of the Indian Sundarbans region on the northern shore of the Bay of Bengal will be submerged by 2020.''A lot of other islands are eroding very fast,'' he said.The cyclone-prone region is also likely to experience more frequent and extreme storms as the sea-water temperature in the Bay of Bengal rises due to global warming
Read more: www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/rising-sea-leve...
Can we stop the seas from rising? Yes, but less than you think.
One of the main concerns with climate change is that it's causing the oceans to advance. Global sea levels have risen about seven inches over the past century and that pace is accelerating. Not only does this threaten coastal regions, but it also makes storm surges much worse — both for huge hurricanes like Sandy and for smaller storms too.And the oceans are likely to keep creeping up. Scientists project that if we keep warming the planet at our current pace, sea levels could rise between two and seven feet by 2100, particularly as the world's glaciers and ice caps melt. So that raises the question: Is there anything we can do to stop sea-level rise? How much would cutting greenhouse-gas emissions help?As it turns out, reducing our emissions would help slow the rate of sea-level rise — but at this point, it's unlikely that we could stop further rises altogether. That's the upshot of a recent study from the National Center on Atmospheric Research (NCAR). The study estimated that aggressive steps to cut emissions could reduce the amount of sea-level rise by somewhere between 6 and 20 inches in 2100, compared with our current trajectory. That's quite a bit. But sea levels will keep rising for centuries no matter what we do. We can't stop it entirely. We can only slow the pace.As NCAR's Gerald Meehl, a co-author of the study, explained to me by e-mail, it's a lot easier to stabilize global temperatures by cutting carbon emissions than it is to stabilize sea-level rise. The carbon-dioxide that we've already loaded into the atmosphere will likely have effects on the oceans for centuries to come. "But with aggressive mitigation," Meehl added, "you can slow down the rate of sea level rise, which buys time for adaptation measures."There are two ways that global warming causes sea levels to rise. First, as carbon-dioxide traps more heat on the planet, the oceans get warmer and expand in volume. Second, ice caps in Greenland and Antarctica as well as other glaciers start melting, pouring more water into the oceans. Once these processes get underway, they won't stop quickly, even if we ceased putting carbon-dioxide into the atmosphere tomorrow.The NCAR paper estimated that if emissions go unchecked, we could warm the planet 4°C over pre-industrial levels by 2100, causing sea levels to rise between two and five feet. By contrast, if we get really proactive at cutting emissions, we could probably keep the temperature increase below 2°C. But sea levels would still rise by between 11 inches and 3.5 feet. (The wide range is due to the uncertainties in modeling the behavior of glaciers and ice sheets—if the ice sheets destabilize, a bigger rise is possible.) That's progress, but not total victory.We're going to need to adapt to sea-level rise no matter what we do on carbon emissions. Even the "optimistic" scenario in the NCAR paper still envisions sea-levels rising roughly 11 inches by 2100. That's assuming we cut emissions drastically and the ice sheets don't do anything too unpredictable. Even then, New York City will have a bigger flood zone than it does today. Storm surges on the coasts will be much larger. Low-lying areas will be at greater risk. In Bangladesh, for instance, the area prone to severe flooding would increase by 69 percent (pdf) with just a foot of sea-level rise.That said, cutting emissions can make a significant difference this century. Keeping sea-level rise a foot or two lower than it otherwise might be is nothing to sneeze at. As this map of New York City shows, the flood zone increases dramatically with each additional foot of sea-level rise. A city like Norfolk, Va. could get swamped entirely by a Category 3 hurricane if ocean levels rose by two to five feet. Florida's adaptation costs go up by billions of dollars with each additional foot of sea-level rise. Every little bit helps.Sea-level rise is likely a much bigger problem for future generations. Not to get too morbid, but I'll probably be dead by 2100. So will most people reading this blog. So the main question at issue here is whether we want to leave our descendants a relatively stable coastline or an unstable one. According to NCAR projections, sea levels could rise as much as 34 feet, or nine meters, by 2300 if emissions continue unchecked (though modeling projections that far out have very large uncertainties, so don't take this as a definitive number). To get a sense of what a nine-meter rise would look like, check out this interactive map. South Florida would be underwater. So would New Orleans. And Shanghai. And the Netherlands. And Bangladesh. But this is also 200 years in the future. That's a big reason why climate change is such a difficult problem to deal with.
www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/11/01/can...
Les pays du monde entier vont vivre au rythme des négociations climatiques du 29 novembre au 11 décembre 2015. Un accord entre 195 pays doit être trouvé pour maintenir le réchauffement climatique en dessous des 2 degrés, d’ici à 2050. Mais comment se déroulent les négociations derrière les portes du Bourget, où 150 chefs d’états et plus de 40 000 personnes sont attendus? Nous suivons Caroline Tubercule, membre de l’équipe française de négociation dans son marathon pour sauver la planète.
En savoir plus sur www.lemonde.fr/cop21/video/2015/11/29/en-patates-comprend...
Malgré l'interdiction de manifester, 10.000 personnes se sont réunies dimanche à Paris pour participer à une chaîne humaine contre le réchauffement climatique, selon les organisateurs."cette chaîne humaine, c'est un contre-pouvoir citoyen à la conférence officielle qui sera contre-productive car elle est faite avec des industriels dont les intérêts sont contraires à l'écologie."
www.lesechos.fr/paris-climat-2015/actualites/021518198440...
A BNSF and two CN GE's head east passing the display cars at the Griffith RR Museum.
Griffith, IN
Photo by John Eagan
While we are enjoying the peaceful beauty of Spring, please realize how blessed we are and don't forget the victims of war. Peace, same as life, fragile by nature, must be nurtured, preserved and protected. One senseless act of violence on a large scale by an evil mind can wipe it out and turn our world upside down. History will repeat itself if we allow it through our silence and inaction.
Name: Jessica Chobot
Hardcore gamer and host/writer for IGN Entertainment, Jessica (aka The Baroness) says she often reads manga on the toilet.
A limited edition anime-style collectible J!NX figurine of Jessica is slated to be manufactured by the Southern Island Toy Company.
She ROCKS at Guitar Hero!!!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Photography by Love Ablan
For more information on the Fangirl Project photo documentary, go to http://www.fangirlproject.com
Candid pictures from conventions can be found on my other flickr, LoveByte.
The WonderPana Ultra Wide Angle Filter System is great for video work as well as photography. - Photo by Bohus Blahut
Model: Jess D
Location: Edmonton
----------
Hit the L key for a better view. Thanks for the favs and comments. Much appreciated!
-------------
All of my photographs are under copyright ©. None of these photographs may be reproduced and/or used in any way without my permission.
© VanveenJF Photography
What began as a protest by the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg, who decided to skip school on Fridays to draw attention to the plight of the planet, has turned into the biggest mass demonstration in history. Millions of people have marched in the streets in 150 countries from Australia to Iceland to protest about global warming. The demonstrations have been led by young people inspired by Greta Thunberg, but have been attended by all ages.
Not surprisingly US President Donald Trump has said he will not attend the upcoming UN Climate Summit, and equally as unsurprising Australia has been denied a speaking role because of our Governments shameful record of opening new fossil fuel mines like Adani and inaction on other climate change matters.
These images from the Melbourne event where 100,000+ people gathered and marched.
"Like it or not, the choices are now reduced to an ugly outcome that rewards rather than punishes Putin for the act of aggression — or the strong possibility of terminal war."
- Noam Chomsky (Speaking to Truthout.org 1 March 2022 truthout.org/articles/noam-chomsky-us-military-escalation... )
"Repeatedly the reaction to real or imagined crisis has been to reach for the six-gun rather than the olive branch. It’s almost a reflex, and the consequences have generally been awful — for the traditional victims. It’s always worthwhile to try to understand, to think a step or two ahead about the likely consequences of action or inaction."
- Noam Chomsky (01.03.22 speaking with Truthout.org)
I post this series of photos of an anti-war protest in central London as a neutral observer (more photos will be following soon). I'm no fan of either Russian or Western imperialism and military aggression and I have every sympathy with the Ukrainians who are facing a war of aggression from their more powerful northern neighbour, part of the motive for which seems to be to rebuild the prestige and power of Russia, as a sort of new Russian empire reflecting the former hegemonic influence over Eastern Europe of the Soviet Union. All at an immense cost in lives, and also a clear and grave violation of international law. Putin's decision to escalate the nuclear standoff with the West by publicly placing his nuclear forces on high alert should be another reminder of just how dangerous he is.
However, the West should also share a significant portion of the blame for this war. The Russian invasion is far from "unprovoked" as many media commentators claim. First, we have to remember recent history and how Russia has good reason to fear NATO which was originally set up to combat the threat of the 'Russian hordes.' It is remarkable how in 1990 Mikhail Gorbachev, despite his familiarity with Germany's responsibility for having invaded Russia twice during the twentieth century (in 1914 and 1941), agreed to allow East Germany to join West Germany inside a hostile military alliance. There was however a quid pro quo, as promised by President George H. W. Bush (senior) and Secretary of State James Baker that NATO wouldn't move "another inch to the east" but that promise was soon broken as during the Clinton presidency, Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary joined, and then under President George W. Bush, the NATO alliance was further extended to include Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and the Baltic States, and further still under Obama to Croatia and Albania.
This means that NATO forces are now frequently deployed right around Russia's western borders (except for Ukraine and Belarus). One can imagine, Washington's paranoia, if say in the 1960s or 1970s, Mexico and Canada had declared their intention to join the Warsaw Pact and many people may be familiar with how Cuba's desire to station Soviet missiles on its territory to deter a feared US invasion (and frequent terror attacks), almost led to a nuclear war, though fortunately Khrushchev saw wisdom and backed down in the face of JFK's terrifying brinkmanship and secretly the United States did agree to withdraw some of its older strategic nuclear missiles from Turkey.
At the same time the United States sees Ukraine as occupying a key space on the strategic chessboard, and has ensured that Ukraine has become increasingly dependent on foreign debt and Washington's goodwill, and has continued to plan for Ukraine's eventual incorporation into NATO. That would mean Ukraine, which occupies a vital strategic position on Russia's southern flank and with its border just 350 miles from Moscow, would also become a potential platform for an assault on Russia and even if no assault ever occurred, the mere fact of NATO's enhanced power, would inevitably greatly diminish any remaining influence Russia had to counterbalance US hegemony in Europe. That's why Ukraine's membership of NATO is something which no Russian leader was ever likely to accept. It is of course easy to see a possible compromise - that Ukraine should remain neutral but that in return all countries should respect its territorial integrity, although allowing some autonomy for the Russian speaking areas in Crimea and the Donbass.
Western media has downplayed the suffering of the Russian population in the Donbass region, which for years has been subjected to constant shelling from government forces, and although Ukrainian civilians have also been killed by Russian backed separatists, the UN figures clearly show that year after year, it was the Russian population which suffered a far higher level of fatalities and serious injuries, including the deaths of many children.
ukraine.un.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/Conflict-relat...
Western media also holds up Ukraine as a beacon of freedom and democracy, but while there have been some important gains for civil society in recent years, Russians have good reason to be unhappy. The Ukraine government has harassed and detained several opposition and pro-Russian journalists and in February 2017 it banned the commercial importation of books from Russia and a new education law made Ukrainian the sole language of instruction in secondary schools, which obviously discriminated against its Russian population. Fascist militias are also growing in number and corruption is endemic while the UN Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture suspects the Ukrainian government of operating secret prisons.
However, it should be noted that the human rights record of the separatist regions of Luhansk and Donetsk have also received intense criticism from the UN OHCHR (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights) and various NGOs for suspected human rights abuses, while Russia's appalling human rights record and its increasing authoritarianism is well known.
To avoid the enormous risk of a nuclear confrontation the West has to start thinking of a way to allow Putin to climb down, without jeopardising European security or sacrificing the freedoms of the Ukrainian people and the obvious way would be to agree to recognise Ukraine as a neutral sovereign state which would remain outside NATO and with a real democratic autonomy for the Luhansk and Donetsk regions.
If the West continues to funnel enormous quantities of high tech military equipment into Ukraine, without any attempt to reach a political compromise (by recognising Russia's legitimate security concerns and autonomy for the Donbass region while still guaranteeing Ukraine's sovereignty) there's a very real risk that an increasingly frustrated Putin will issue an ultimatum for the tactical use of nuclear weapons in order to regain the upper hand on the battlefield, and this will be an incredibly dangerous moment for humankind.
disuse, noun...the state of not being used.
"Just as iron rusts from disuse, even so does inaction spoil the intellect."
Leonardo da Vinci
...better keep those brain cells busy then!
textures thanks to Skeletalmess
“Peace is the only battle worth waging”
-Albert Camus
"Repeatedly the reaction to real or imagined crisis has been to reach for the six-gun rather than the olive branch. It’s almost a reflex, and the consequences have generally been awful — for the traditional victims. It’s always worthwhile to try to understand, to think a step or two ahead about the likely consequences of action or inaction."
- Noam Chomsky (1 March 2022 speaking with Truthout.org)
"It may feel satisfying to drive the bear into a corner from which it will lash out in desperation — as it can. Hardly wise."
- Noam Chomsky (1 March 2022)
“ Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding.” —Albert Einstein
I post this series of photos of an anti-war protest in central London as a neutral observer (more photos will be following soon). I'm no fan of either Russian or Western imperialism and military aggression and I have every sympathy with the Ukrainians who are facing a war of aggression from their more powerful northern neighbour, part of the motive for which seems to be to rebuild the prestige and power of Russia, as a sort of new Russian empire reflecting the former hegemonic influence over Eastern Europe of the Soviet Union. All at an immense cost in lives, and also a clear and grave violation of international law. Putin's decision to escalate the nuclear standoff with the West by publicly placing his nuclear forces on high alert should be another reminder of just how dangerous he is.
However, the West should also share a significant portion of the blame for this war. The Russian invasion is far from "unprovoked" as many media commentators claim. First, we have to remember recent history and how Russia has good reason to fear NATO which was originally set up to combat the threat of the 'Russian hordes.' It is remarkable how in 1990 Mikhail Gorbachev, despite his familiarity with Germany's responsibility for having invaded Russia twice during the twentieth century (in 1914 and 1941), agreed to allow East Germany to join West Germany inside a hostile military alliance. There was however a quid pro quo, as promised by President George H. W. Bush (senior) and Secretary of State James Baker that NATO wouldn't move "another inch to the east" but that promise was soon broken as during the Clinton presidency, Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary joined, and then under President George W. Bush, the NATO alliance was further extended to include Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and the Baltic States, and further still under Obama to Croatia and Albania.
This means that NATO forces are now frequently deployed right around Russia's western borders (except for Ukraine and Belarus). One can imagine, Washington's paranoia, if say in the 1960s or 1970s, Mexico and Canada had declared their intention to join the Warsaw Pact and many people may be familiar with how Cuba's desire to station Soviet missiles on its territory to deter a feared US invasion (and frequent terror attacks), almost led to a nuclear war, though fortunately Khrushchev saw wisdom and backed down in the face of JFK's terrifying brinkmanship and secretly the United States did agree to withdraw some of its older strategic nuclear missiles from Turkey.
At the same time the United States sees Ukraine as occupying a key space on the strategic chessboard, and has ensured that Ukraine has become increasingly dependent on foreign debt and Washington's goodwill, and has continued to plan for Ukraine's eventual incorporation into NATO. That would mean Ukraine, which occupies a vital strategic position on Russia's southern flank and with its border just 350 miles from Moscow, would also become a potential platform for an assault on Russia and even if no assault ever occurred, the mere fact of NATO's enhanced power, would inevitably greatly diminish any remaining influence Russia had to counterbalance US hegemony in Europe. That's why Ukraine's membership of NATO is something which no Russian leader was ever likely to accept. It is of course easy to see a possible compromise - that Ukraine should remain neutral but that in return all countries should respect its territorial integrity, although allowing some autonomy for the Russian speaking areas in Crimea and the Donbass.
Western media has downplayed the suffering of the Russian population in the Donbass region, which for years has been subjected to constant shelling from government forces, and although Ukrainian civilians have also been killed by Russian backed separatists, the UN figures clearly show that year after year, it was the Russian population which suffered a far higher level of fatalities and serious injuries, including the deaths of many children.
ukraine.un.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/Conflict-relat...
Western media also holds up Ukraine as a beacon of freedom and democracy, but while there have been some important gains for civil society in recent years, Russians have good reason to be unhappy. The Ukraine government has harassed and detained several opposition and pro-Russian journalists and in February 2017 it banned the commercial importation of books from Russia and a new education law made Ukrainian the sole language of instruction in secondary schools, which obviously discriminated against its Russian population. Fascist militias are also growing in number and corruption is endemic while the UN Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture suspects the Ukrainian government of operating secret prisons.
However, it should be noted that the human rights record of the separatist regions of Luhansk and Donetsk have also received intense criticism from the UN OHCHR (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights) and various NGOs for suspected human rights abuses, while Russia's appalling human rights record and its increasing authoritarianism is well known.
To avoid the enormous risk of a nuclear confrontation the West has to start thinking of a way to allow Putin to climb down, without jeopardising European security or sacrificing the freedoms of the Ukrainian people and the obvious way would be to agree to recognise Ukraine as a neutral sovereign state which would remain outside NATO and with a real democratic autonomy for the Luhansk and Donetsk regions.
If the West continues to funnel enormous quantities of high tech military equipment into Ukraine, without any attempt to reach a political compromise (by recognising Russia's legitimate security concerns and autonomy for the Donbass region while still guaranteeing Ukraine's sovereignty) there's a very real risk that an increasingly frustrated Putin will issue an ultimatum for the tactical use of nuclear weapons in order to regain the upper hand on the battlefield, and this will be an incredibly dangerous moment for humankind.
1: A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2: A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3: A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics.
What began as a protest by the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg, who decided to skip school on Fridays to draw attention to the plight of the planet, has turned into the biggest mass demonstration in history. Millions of people have marched in the streets in 150 countries from Australia to Iceland to protest about global warming. The demonstrations have been led by young people inspired by Greta Thunberg, but have been attended by all ages.
Not surprisingly US President Donald Trump has said he will not attend the upcoming UN Climate Summit, and equally as unsurprising Australia has been denied a speaking role because of our Governments shameful record of opening new fossil fuel mines like Adani and inaction on other climate change matters.
These images from the Melbourne event where 100,000+ people gathered and marched.
Our new 30" wide FlapJack Studio XL in action on a fashion shoot with DGN.STUDIO. Check out our Fotodiox YouTube or Facebook page to see a video about this beautiful new light!
What began as a protest by the Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg, who decided to skip school on Fridays to draw attention to the plight of the planet, has turned into the biggest mass demonstration in history. Millions of people have marched in the streets in 150 countries from Australia to Iceland to protest about global warming. The demonstrations have been led by young people inspired by Greta Thunberg, but have been attended by all ages.
Not surprisingly US President Donald Trump has said he will not attend the upcoming UN Climate Summit, and equally as unsurprising Australia has been denied a speaking role because of our Governments shameful record of opening new fossil fuel mines like Adani and inaction on other climate change matters.
These images from the Melbourne event where 100,000+ people gathered and marched.
TATRA PHOENIX 8x6 Agro Truck with the Fliegl 40 m3 silage extension
- Paccar 340 kW engine
- ZF AS Tronic automatic transmission
You can follow us:
Hit the L key for a better view. Thanks for the favs and comments. Much appreciated!
------------
Model: Natalia
Location: St.Albert
-------------
All of my photographs are under copyright ©. None of these photographs may be reproduced and/or used in any way without my permission.
© VanveenJF Photography