Sunday, April 22, 2018

A NOT ENTIRELY SERIOUS SUGGESTION


Not how it's done these days



Now even the NYTimes is stealing my ideas!  The article featured below describes “carbon-farming”, which is a new paradigm in agriculture aimed at combating global warming by farming in such a way as to store atmospheric carbon in the earth – while still managing to feed humanity.  A good idea, really.

But it all began with my idea, which I called “coalification”.

Trees, as you all know, grow by sucking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and building “complex carbohydrates” (sugars).  So while they are alive they are carbon sinks.  However, when they die they usually either rot, or burn, thus returning carbon to the air.  So, on balance, trees are a wash.

But sometimes they get turned into coal – a grand and efficient storage container for carbon.

Coal forms when vegetation dies but neither rots nor burns.  This usually happens in swamps or marshes – places where the dead stuff can waste away out of contact with the earth’s surface.  After thousands of years, pressure from the weight of overlying sediment, and maybe a little heating, the original organic material, cleansed of all extraneous admixtures, becomes COAL –  ready to heat our homes, generate our electricity, and do a nasty number on our environment.

So the antidote to global warming is obvious: grow trees, cut them down when they are mature – and bury them.  Make more coal, but never dig it up!

Of course, this might require producing the entire world’s food on a tiny scrap of land, and turning all the remaining farm land into forest.  Hello GMO and inorganic farming!  Better buy Monsanto.

I publicly elucidated this policy years ago.  Of course, it was over beer at the Chuckanut.  I never get no credit!


Wednesday, April 4, 2018

COFFEE A CARCINOGEN? Gimme a break!


Coffee in the morning to get me going
Alcohol in the evening to slow me down

Well, I should have seen it coming, but I didn’t. 

As aid in my cancer blogging I subscribe to many news sources, including Google alerts (about ovarian cancer), the NCI and NIH newsletters, Cancer Currents, Lancet – and a whole bunch more.  I also receive (free) the NYTimes Science Newsletter.  It was through the latter that I finally broke down and subscribed to the Times itself (digital version, much limited in content).  That was the straw (log, rather) that finally broke the poor camel’s back.

This is by way of revealing that my Gmail inbox has become so cluttered that entire items, once read, can disappear.  This is what happened with a report on coffee.  I would like to cite it accurately, but you will have to make do with my general impressions.

It seems that some judge in California (where else?) has ruled that coffee must come labeled with a cancer warning.  It appears that coffee-bean roasting produces a chemical known to cause cancer in rats; in what quantity not stated.  Ergo, to be safe – every coffee container must be adorned with a warning.  Are you serious?

First of all, coffee consumption has been shown to be beneficial in the case of prostate cancer.  Secondly, I know of no clinical trial that links moderate – or even heavy – coffee consumption to cancer risk.  Thirdly, I am convinced (on the basis of no evidence) that massive consumption of ANYTHING is bad for your health.  Nuts to you, judge, you can’t scare me!

So they take away red meat, sugar, alcohol, and most everything else that gives life a little kick.  I serve notice that I will not stand for it.  A life sustained by broccoli, cauliflower and celery is not worth living!

And, there, I just finished my nasty, dark cup of Starbucks Frence Roast.