Uncomfortable Truths: Why Spain Is Different

Five years ago I read an interview that was made to Mr José Santamarta, director of the Worldwatch Institute in Spain. After reading such interview I could not help to think about his words and came to my mind ... "to vary they are pulling our leg". The thing is that they are not only pulling our leg but also we are beginning to assume the abnormal as normal and the opposite: to assume the normal as abnormal.

Some of you will wonder: what did Mr José say? First, he said a thing that is in the thought of many (hopefully many): "The big infrastructures lend themselves to corruption more than other public business but of course they are more photogenic, it is, to cut the tape or lay the foundation stone before the elections is for some politicians far more necessary than modest and transparent investments in education, culture and healing. " 

On the other hand you have some facts that are not so promoted. I don't know if it happens because of neglect or because somehow they are uncomfortable truths... "According to the Worldwatch report a highway carries 2,500 people per hour, a bus line from 5000-8000, a tram or bus with a dedicated lane10,000 to 20,000, and the subway and commuter rail transport 50,000 people per hour, 20 times more than a highway. ". 

Now the question is: who matters that? Hei man, let things go hang...

Mails To The Director

The articles I usually post come from my thoughts or different pieces of news I read from time to time. And as in any job, there are more productive days than others or worse: there are days which are not productive at all. So I take advantage of that more productives days in order to write the posts and let them in a pile for when necessary (it is, days without any idea or nothing to say).

With respect to an article I posted some time ago, Ardorín, a friend of mine, made  a comment who brought to my mind a piece of news  which I had piled. So my friend, here you have a mail which was written to the persone in charge of the newspaper El País. The mail was edited in May 27th, 2007. the author is Nicolás Fabelo González, Galápagos, Madrid, who makes a reflection which I think is very interesting and which should be in the thoughts of everybody.

OUR FAULTS ARE OURS NEVER

Traffic accidents have increased: it's roads fault, missing signposting, weather conditions... but never to blame for people who aggresively or madly drive, never to blame for those who show off driving at 180 km/h; perhaps is better to criticize those who drive according to the law...

Junk TV consolidate its leadership on TV media but it's not our fault. We have to claim on TV chains as  there is no room for cultural programs, maybe we also have to claim on politiciens for not giving a proper answer to this issue, maybe it will be the inherent cultural poverty of the capitalism but... has anybody thought that TV chains behave as markets? It is, they only sell what it is bought... has anybody thought about the gossiping and coarsing spirit of many individuals of our society who being idle in their sofa practise an absolute power on their remote control?

Climate change is worsening: We should claim on transnational  companies, on predator capitalism, the EEUU government, etc, etc... but never claim on those who overuse their SUVs just for a box of Cokes, those who set their heating system at 26ºC or the air conditioning at 17ºC, those who never will understand that winter has been created for being "cold" and summer for being "hot".

Many shameless individuals who have got loaded thanks to the destruction of the environment and spreading around the urbanistic chaos... so we should claim on the world of politics, on the defects in politics which rule the use of the land, on the capitalism rapacity... but never we should claim on those who are far more interested on the last signing of their football team than in the management of their comunity or municipality.

Summarizing: Our fault is never our fault, devil seems to come from politiciens, business people, journalists or from that dark abstraction called "the System".

Moral of the day: we see the mote in others eyes but not the beam in ours own.

Men's Things

Independently some people could think that organic food is something for spoilt guys, there also some other people who state that pesticides and insecticides affect the brain, the liver and the reproductive system. Respect to the latter, there was in 2007 a research carried out by the Copenhaguen Rishospital that stated that the organic food achives men have a 43% more sperm than a normal block. I perfectly know that somebody will think that this is a strange post and with no much message, for not saying nothing at all, but as the article spoke about organic food and I felt like speaking about that... what you see is what you get.

I got the information from a spanish newspaper in 2007, now here you have a simmilar piece of news but in English: Organic Food In Relation To Nutrition.  

That's all for now.

To Somebody Who Is Bored

Is being somebody potentially bored next weekend? In such case, I leave for them a reflecition made by  Hegel about History; what we were, what we are and what we will be according to our nowadays acts.

"History is like a rivercourse. Every small movement of the water in a certain point of the course is really determined by the fall of the water and its swirls at the top. But it is also determined by the rocks and  the meanders just at the point in which we are looking at".

Are We Humans More Animals Than Animals Themselves?

Following the thread of one of my posts and thinking once more about the girls and boys who will be the men and the women of the future, I think it's worth watching the video that my friend Leo sent me some time ago. Now every reader should get his/her own conclusions.

90% Hypocrisy

Once upon a night in which I spent my time having a look at a magazined specialized on fruits and vegetables. Although there are some people who don’t believe it, there are magazines for people from all walks of life. Among all the many different sections there was one dedicated to ecology and I could observe that it was a survey about the degree of concern of Spanish people respect to climate change. Although it could seem unbelievable, 90% of the Spaniards show to be very concerned (I am speaking about the month of June 2007). Should I begin to laugh or to cry? Is anybody pulling my leg? Who on earth has been in charge of carrying such survey and where? Were they collecting the data in an ecologist demonstration? Sincerely, I couldn’t believe it.

With such level of concern things would be very different. Firstly, the use of bicycles would be far greater. Secondly, the fact of driving a car would be far smaller. I wonder if traffic jams would continue being traffic jams. I wonder if so many people would continue doing an irresponsible use of paper, if so many people would continue carrying out an irresponsible use of air conditioning and if many of they would continue travelling and consuming in an irresponsible way. This late on in life I can’t accept people telling they don’t have enough information. We are to be lazy and fat, there’s no way.

A Message From Music

Juan Carlos Císcar

That's the name of a graduate who works at the Sevilla's Insitute for Prospective Technological Studies. In January 14th 2007 the newspaper called Levante published an interview to Juan Carlos with regard to climate change. Among other questions.... Campaigns in order to create awareness on climate change  appeal to the role that citizens play at this issue. Do you think they can do something in order to prevent pernicious effects on agriculture and marine coasts? Something in particular?

Juan Carlos' answer was... Undoubtedly. The problem of climate change is in short a problem generated by we citizens who ask for products which are polluting as a last resort, from using cars to something so common as switching on a bulb.

He commented as well that citizens should be persuaded from polluting activities, e.g. flying,  through taxes..... Fortunatelly in that moment I was not the only one asking people for reducing domestic flights as a first measure... And some good news, in that moment 35% of the companies all over the world were planning to reduce their flights or at least it was in their plans in the short-medium term. How is it possible to find flights at a european level at 30€? Maybe my petitions could be too demanding but I am one of those who think that low-cost flights = a free terrorist attack against the environment. I agree that everybody has the right to flight but in a reasonable way. As we humans sometimes don't have clear ideas about what is wrong or right, a first approximation could be attacking our budgets. He who pollutes must pay.

"Share" Is The Key

Some days ago I read an article about the otters resurgence in some parts of England. However, such resurgence has shown once more the concept of property that we have respect to the planet. And maybe here we have the key to resolve the problem of cohabitation that we have with the rest of forms of life with which we share the planet. I repeat the keyword: share. We are not only unaware of the point that we human species alone are consuming more than 50% of the resources of the planet. We are so cheeky that have even claimed for the recovery of some species like the one of the otters.

I could understand that someone claims because a certain species is destroying their way of making a living but having someone claiming because on holidays are not going to fish as much as expected is outrageous. This is the case of the otters in England. Maybe the selfishness and blindness of those claimers prevent them from understanding that planet Earth is shared. The otters have the same rights than humans to enjoy the rivers and make of them their way of living. It seems that everybody is wrong except us. I think it's high time to understand that our overpopulation and comsumption of resources should be the first thing on this planet to be under a strict control.

Thanks Rafa for your videos, they show the shameful way of how we deal with Life all over this planet.

Bloody Party

For different questions, one of the things that get on my nerves is everything related to bullfighting. I don't know if it is the experience of Life or whateverthing related with the pass of the years but fortunately little by little I'm getting over the subject and I am able to cope with it when somebody says they are for the "party".

Some time ago, when for circumstances of life I spoke more to my friend Vicente about this issue, one of my statements was to say "I don't know what's up in the mind of those people who enjoy such insulting spectacle. How do people can enjoy  such slaughter and call it "art"?

From my mind "art" it's creation. How can people call art something which suposes the jibe and destruction of a life just for fun? Can we call art the fact of pierce with a sword  sombody's lungs and heart? Does it justify the diversion of a minority the violation of the most important right that any thing on Earth has (it's the right to live)? To make matters worse, there are some people who attend bloody events like bullfighting and later are saying they're against war and abortion... I can't absolutely understand  how somebody can call art the fact of stucking harpoons (normally called banderillas) to an animal without any reason and last but not least,  to go through its lungs, causing a flood of blood which culminates in death by suffocation.

It's not something punctual to see how the animal ends its days among vomits of blood, I can't think in such fast death as someone tries convince us... have we gone crazy? Has somebody heard the word "puntilla", that's the typical knife used just in case the animal is a bit "rebel" to die. No comments, there are no justification to  keep this bloody business on.

Here you can appreciate the bullfighter sticking something on the upper part of the bull's neck (the "puntilla").

After seeing all this we have still people for bullfighting saying, you eat pollo and beef, don't you? In my case difficult it is besides I'm a vegetarian, but in a slaguhterhouse, if the animal is treated as it is supposed ,it should not suffer a hell as it happens in the square, what some of us call the circle of the unliterates. Everybody deceives a decent death.

If you come to Spain you will be able to listen quotes as "if bullfighting didn't exist bulls would become extinct" but as romans did, e.g. threw christians to lions, today we can continue enjoying the lions in the wild fortunately. What's more, we have some animals like donkeys which became obselete but which are protected and subsidized nowadays. So what's the problem? 

Others say that bullfighters put into risk their "boles", yes, as you listen but... let me tell you that there are other "machos" like workers cleaning windows in skycrapers, divers working in the very deep in oil rigs at sea, people working at height in windpower farms, electric pylons, police officers, fire men, military, etc, etc... And of course, it is unacceptable to say that the bull can defend itself cause if it is not killed by the first bullfighter will be the second or the third and so on. Bullfighting is not hunting, I'm not for hunting but in general the animal has the possibility of escaping. The story of the bull is crystal clear: once in the square, what we call "ruedo", its days are numbered, the story is finished (except in a very, very few number of occasions in which it's reprieved).

Last but not least, I leave you a video to show everybody round the world a little sample of what happens in our "national party". This is not Spain and not all spaniards are for bullfighting, for goodness' sake!! Thanks Stefano for the links.

Happy new year 2011 to everybody and I hope the new year comes with stronger acts to prohibit bullfighting once for all.

Xmas Time Is Coming: Keep This In Mind

Oceans Empty Of Life And Plenty Of Noise And Rubbish

The Revenge

Some shameless people should be in the situation of the video.He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.

Quotes

The magician made a gesture
and famine disappeared,
the magician made a gesture
and poverty disappeared.
The politicien made a gesture...
and the magician disappeared.

Orange or Lemon?

The Orange

In April 2007 the news related to climate were about if we warm the planet more than two celsius degrees, as an average, the damage will be irreparable and maybe events will be out of control. Global temperature had increased 0.7 ºC by that moment. It was also told that we were on time to reduce our emissions but this seems not to have changed so much. There have been some steps but, have they really been enough? Some comments from the NASA.

The Lemon

Between the end of this century and the beggining of the following, the millions of us who already live, or have survived, we'll have to do it at the Poles where climate will be comfortable enough. James Lovelock. Scientist and inventor.

Which flavour do you prefer?

Have Things Changed Something In 6 Years?

I posted in April 2007 some comments about de main headlines related to the environment. In that moment after 3 years, things hadn't changed a lot. Now, 3 years later, the question is reaised once again. Maybe people are more concerned, there are some steps being taken but there's a new question: can these measures catch up with the level of destruction? I'm in doubt. Three examples to think about: Europe's seas face 'bleak future', €1.1 trillion and 2010 living planet report. And now some headlines from 2004 to 2007:

• Climate change threatens beaches in the Mediterranean Sea.
• Patagonia's glaciars could disappear in twenty years time.
• Global warming could come great famines and the melting of the Himalaya.
• Climate change will leave 200 million refugees in 2050.
• Ten important natural reservas under threat.
• Global warming threatens 30% of flora and fauna.
• Equator declares the Galapago Islands at risk.
• Scientists declare the collapse of marine ecosystems.

Amen.

The Footprint Of Your Bottled Water

First of all here you are a report about the footprint of bottled water consumption: click here. Second, when we buy something I think we should take into account the point of departure of the product so that way the thought would become part of what is called "responsible consumption".

Among the products with an important footprint is not only the bottled water but also off-season fruit. We could say that eating the off-season fruit has become second nature but if we take into account that such fruit has been brought from Equator to Spain for example, that could be something bad as it has surely been brought by plane (a really important machine for generating CO2 emissions). If we speak in general terms, a ship emits 0.002 Kg of CO2 per kilometre and ton transported. The same distance and weight for a train is 0.069, 0.11 for a truck and 2 for the plane. It is, for the same distance a plane pollutes 1000 times more than a ship, I don't know if you get the idea... Because of this I raise, the spanish government plans are focused on promoting the railway network and sea routes. Time will tell.

And speaking about bottled water another question would be: why not using glass bottles as we did some years ago? I don't know if in other countries has happened but here in Spain, a twenty years ago, it was something usual to get a discount for returning an empty glass bottle when you bought a new one (filled up with the product of course). It is true that the majority of the bottled water which is sold is bottled in plastic and because of that we should get in contact with the company which makes the product asking for a change  respect to the bottling. The glass bottles are 100% recyclable, in other words, we could use the same material for ever in practical terms (the quantity of missing material is trivial compared to plastic) and the quantity of energy and material necessary in the process is far less than making plastic bottles. The moral today would be: The more glass-bottled water you use the tinier your footprint will be.

And finally, please, keep in mind this is not an apology for consuming bottled water, keep in mind we should drink tap water but just in case we need to buy bottled water for any reason, be responsible and opt for glass bottles as far as possible of course.

And now a nice story to summarise the impact of plastic bottles on our environment and pockets.

Something Simple and Efficient: A Bicycle

Sometimes I become angry because of the prices of the energy, not because it is expensive but cause I think there many interests into play. However, every time I ride the bicycle along the city and see the way in which we use our cars and air conditioning in homes and shops I said to myself: We don't pay enough for energy, it is cheap till...

Now the thing is: How to make people to understand that our life style of excess and waste should be over? Every day I'm more convinced that many people don't really care about environment and the state of the planet. They just think about themselves or simply, as a human way of scape, they assume that environmental problems are not such a big deal. In other words: human resistance to accept CHANGE.

I don't know what readers will think about what I'm going to say. It's obvious that an environmental education is necessary at schools and centres of education but, most important, for all those ones who "don't care", controlling their expenditure is the key. High prices for energy is the way to understand that we humans can't continue wasting around and eating up natural resources. I could give two examples of how people would behave in front of increasing prices of fuel:

1. There are surveys which point out that 20% of the mileage is unnecessary. Have you realized how many energy could be saved at a planetary scale?


2. More than one would stop speeding. They would keep tyres pumped up (so they would last longer and would also save more money), they wouldn't accelerate hard and driving would be a bit slower (which would save human and wildlife lifes on the roads).

Once more the key is: Everyone should accept that CHANGE is necessary. Fuel efficient cars (including hybrid and electric) are not the solution but part of it. And now, as always, speaking about cars... Who speaks about something or reminds that there is something really efficient and cheap as a bicycle? Mssers. Politiciens... Who bears the cars in the cities? Mssers. Politiciens... Who bells the cat?

Children See. Children do.

Long time ago I read the following quote: there's no better education than the example. This quote is a glaring truth. That spanish quote about "Do what I say but don't do what I do" should be something out, something not to be said to children as they are literally parrots and copy exactly what they see at home. It's not worth for a teacher telling a pupil "use your seat belt when in a car" when his father never uses it. I don't know if I transmit you the idea.

I think other world is possible but a better future is only possible making kids to do right things by giving them example. Kant said something like "Act that your principle of action might safely be made a law for the whole world".

Long time ago I also was sent from different people the video which is below, a video which was the spark to begin this post. Thanks guys.

Respect

There are some people who frequently use the word, which titles this post, in a way pretending to be cool and gentle. The question is how far can we tune up the meaning of the word. And why do I say all this? Because there are many people who make a great song and dance about how respectful they are and, when the moment of being in control of the steering wheel arrives, they go from Dr. Jekyll to Mr. Hide. It is in that moment when they speed, when they don't adapt their driving to the circumstances of the road, and it is here where the expression "I control" puts and end to the word which titles the post and begins to increment the possibilities of death for any species who cuts in front of such a cool and pleasant driver.

Our roads have become so big in size and number that have invaded and fragmentated almost all known ecosystems and last but not least, the designers didn't take into account that in those ecosystems there were other forms of life which also need mobility like humans. So the point is that thanks to that design and those cool guys in the driver seat, the possibilities of death notably increase because there is no alternative to cross the roads and move along them.

Only the fact that "the others" were before we arrived is enough reason to decive a respect besides we are "the lowest of the low". The others also have the same right to share this planet. An accident is something unpredictable and outside to driving in a careless way, which would be an imprudence and so something you would have to pay for it.

Millions of animals are dying in roads around the world every day and many of them would save their lives with better designed infrastructures and of course, with a more level-headed way of driving. So keep in mind these words whenever you are at the driver seat, keep in mind that you are driving along different ecosystems with other forms of live moving around as you would do. And of course, keep in mind that only 1% of the money necessary to construct the infrastructure is enough to save millions of lifes. Other question would be how that money is managed...

Here you are two interesting and related links: Carnage on the carriageway & Driving animals to their graves.

Mr. Javier Nart

It could not be in other way, when the talk finished I closed up and congratulated him. Later I made some comments about Mr. Quereda's talk the previous day. Could they both be living in the same world? I liked Javier's talk, surely because our way of thinking was simmilar.

Respecto to the talk, it was started speaking about human rights and, as a universal right we have to enjoy and defend the environment... the line of the contents was changing through environmental issues. It's from here where I will make some coments.

An interesting sentence: when we defend what is not ours we are defending what is ours. The talk raised the social changes that a global climate change would suppose. Conflicts for water that flows through the rivers Eufrates, Jordan and Tigris in the Middle East. Conflicts between China and India because of the river Bramaputra. Respect to China a note for thinking: to produce the same than we western countries, they eat up to 10 times more energy.

There were also some references to population migrations as a consequence of a more agressive climate. Problems could start in Morocco, Algiers, Libya and Egypt. The question is, who is next to these countries? There's no much work in thinking that we spanish are. There were some referencies to the deforestation and the impossibility of living in certain places besides temperatures will get near 60ºC. As you can see, the way of presenting the issue is somehow different to the Mr. Quereda's.

When the talk finished a question-and-answer season was opened. Two people asked how they could do their bit. Coming up next I propose some personal actions I was carrying out in that moment ;)

I would like to finish with quote that Javier raised to finish the talk: We can't complain for anything we don't do to avoid it. And I add up: let's get things clear!

P.S. Maybe someone will think that he can see what I'm up to but in the moment I wrote this post I was a bit fervent with the talk, but it is not a question of somebody seen things in the same way as mine mine, even sometimes I've been told to be a radical... it is a question of showing things, what's more, I have my own smell, I saw things in Mr. Quereda's talk that I didn't like, just personal nuances. Maybe some questions remained unsaid intentional or unintentionally. I think a point of view was given which wasn't related with what was and is happening and maybe neither with what we'll have to face in a no distant future.