Green Ninja

Is It Right for a State to Own Rainwater?

Pictured above are rainwater collection barrels at Neo-Terra.

This sounds almost crazy. I was told by a friend of mine that some states actually claim ownership of rainwater and will prohibit its collection. I did a little research on my own and discovered that it is indeed true.

According to Marten Law Group , water resources are primarily governed by state not the federal government. There is quite an extreme difference from state to state also.

In Washington there has been much controversy over rain water collection. Lawmakers are considering a permit for rainwater capture systems above a threshold amount. Seattle PI reports that a local experimental non-profit farm may actually be in violation of water laws due to the size of their collection system. Colorado prohibits rainwater harvesting. Marten Law Group also reports “Some other states such as Arizona, Hawaii, Kentucky, Ohio, Texas, and West Virginia are all either regulating or considering regulating rainwater harvesting.” On the other hand, the city of Santa Fe, New Mexico actually requires rainwater harvesting. Collection systems must be installed for any new 2,500 square foot or larger residential or commercial building built within the city. What do you think about states claiming ownership of rainwater?

Thanks George for telling me about this!

Corporate Mining Giant to Mine Lands Occupied by Remote Tribe

From the UK Daily Telegraph

“One of the world's most remote hill tribes will learn next week whether it faces being evicted from its forest homeland to make way for an opencast bauxite mine run by one of Britain's biggest listed companies.”

* Bauxite is the chief source of aluminum.

CorpWatch reports

“According to activists, the projects threaten densely forested areas that are home to tiger, Indian bison, bear, and elephant. The affected human population includes impoverished tribal communities, some of whom charge that Vedanta’s projects are illegal, and that the state and central governments are colluding with the company to circumvent environmental protections.”

This sounds awful familiar, how many times in history has another group irrevocably changed native people’s lands and the environment. By now I would think that the price of stripping the land is not worth the environmental damage caused. But, if there is profit to be had someone will step up to take it. The natives of this community revere their land as a god. Their respect of the land has allowed their tribe to retain the land’s natural resources. Mining will surely alter the forest ecosystem, displace many people and animals and cause other environmental stress. It is no surprise that in a short period a huge corporation will strip their mountain of its valuable resources.

The mining corporation, Vedanta Resources, claims that it will contribute to the native tribe by building roads, schools, organizing health care and improved sanitation. The cost of those services is probably trivial when compared to the profit to be gained from the mining. Vedanta claims that the land will be restored to its natural condition after mining. Planting some grass or a few trees is no way near the natural state of land prior to mining. Those who support the mining projects speak highly of the good work of the foundations set up by the mining companies to help the poor people of the village. Helping the people is a good thing but why does it take a profit incentive to want to help them at all. No matter how much good they do, they are likely causing equal or greater detriment to the community and environment by mining.

When things like this are so easily justified, it makes me feel that the future is pretty bleak. Greed always seems to win over common sense. Eventually there will be no choices left and it may be too late for our future generations.

A Comeback for Airships?

Today everyone is coming up with new ideas and bringing back old ones to cut fuel costs and reduce carbon emissions. Some companies are investing in airships as a revived mode of transportation. Most of us have heard of the Hindenburg explosion over 70 years ago and associate that with airships being unsafe. The zeppelins of today are much more sophisticated due to advanced materials and improved propulsion.

The US is researching airship technology but only for military use at the moment. Entrepreneurs in Germany and France are exploring the possibilities of using airships for commercial flights and transporting parcels. In Germany the Deutsche Zeppelin-Reederei transports sightseers and scientific payloads. Over 12,000 people were passengers of Zeppelin-Reederei last year.

Some experts contend that airships will remain a niche vessel and will never expand beyond the occasional tourist flights or transportation of scientific payloads. Airships travel at speed around 100 mph which is slow in comparison to a jet and they require a very large space to land. Storms also pose a concern.

Source: New York Times - Why Fly When You Can Float?