Women Still Slaves! Airlines onboard BioFuels, Stolen Light=Lost Morality?

I LIKE WOMEN – Oh,yeah? Right, big surprise!

It´s not something I have shouted from the "rooftop" of this column (that reaches several thousand people every month according to the statistics kept by the publisher) but I really like women.  No, I mean, I LIKE women, which is to say I like women more than society as a whole seems to do.  Women are THE main oppressed minority in the world, which is ironic since they are actually the majority of the population by a razor thin margin.  But women have traditionally, historically, in most societies around the world been relegated to a second class of human being, subject to the domination  of men, and treated as possessions of their male masters.  If that term, "male masters" smacks of slavery, it should.  Women have been enslaved for at least the last several thousand years.

That is one of the things that I admire about Oprah Winfrey, she is trying to change that.  A recent article on her website is a quick and helpful guide to just a few of the ways that we can see that young women are less disadvantaged in some places in the future.  The article, entitled, "3 Things You Can Do To Empower Women"  specifically recommends a few actions and programs you might want to support.  For instance did you know that a lack of iodine in pregnant women´s diet causes reduced intelligence in their children, and that this disproportionately affects female children?  Not so surprisingly, the Helen Keller Foundation supports programs to convince authorities that ALL sources of dietary salt should be idodized, as it is routinely (and by law) here in America (both USA and Canada).

Up, up and AWAY! 

I have frequently mentioned that various airline and aircraft manufacturing companies have been experimenting with alternative, greener, fuel alternatives, ranging from private pilots who have been trying "bio-ethanol" (or just straight ethanol, and gotten that certified for certain aircraft already), to Syntroleum who have navigated the twisted course to achieve certification for blends of Fischer-Tropsch derived jet fuels.  What I have not focused on is the fact that the airline industry has actually gotten past the kicking and screaming and being dragged into compliance and is now working toward leading the way to greener fuel alternatives.  Many experimental test flight have been flown involving versions of biodiesel, some derived from camelina, some from jatropha, and some from algae oil.  Some even have been testing "green jet" which does not involve the biodiesel transesterification process.  Other processes showing promise include pyrolysis oil upgrading.

All of that is leading toward what may become simultaneous announcements on the international agreements from airline organizations at the same time as those scheduled to come out of the UNCC Conferences in December in Copenhagen Denmark.






The following was snatched, whole from the description of this clip on Youtube.com:

"At the Aviation and Environment Summit 2008, airlines, airports, plane and engine manufacturers and many others came together to collaborate on environmental best practice and sign a declaration committing to further action. Enviro.aero caught up with some of these experts to find out what's being done and what they see as critical to delivering on its visions for a carbon-free future. We spoke to:

Phillipe Rochat, Executive Director, Air Transport Action Group

Giovanni Bisignani, Director General & CEO, International Air Transport Association

Hon. Marion C Blakey, Chairman, International Coordinating Council of Aerospace Industries Associations

Paul Steel, Director Aviation Environment, International Air Transport Association

David McMillan, Director General, Eurocontrol

Alexander ter Kuile, Secretary General, Civil Air Navigation Services Organization

Ulrich Schulte-Strathaus, Secretary General, Association European Airlines

Willie Walsh, CEO, British Airways

Angela Gittens, Director General, Airports Council International"

Just in case you can´t tear yourself away from this column to go visit Youtube, here´s the video included right here, too.

Sign of the Times ?

I suppose that from my state of despair last week of the absolute lack of morality among politicians at the highest levels being unable to tell the truth for even a few minutes on television, my disappointment this week is relatively mild, but I am not prepared to "forgive" this latest transgression and merely chalk it up to recessionary "hard times".

My story is that that my wife and I went to Home Depot this week to buy a 12volt light bulb.  It  was a specialty bulb that is powered from a "Malibu" lighting set transformer (thus the 12 volt type) but it illuminates a brick cairn that I built with my own hands as a "gateway" from our lanai into our backyard garden (one of a matching pair) topped by an antique style post fixture that uses a conventional "standard" lightbulb socket.  Such bulbs are made, but since they are usually only used in RV´s or aboard "yachts", they are singularly expensive for such simple, low-wattage bulbs.  We paid a little more than US$4 after local taxes.

The "unforgiveable" was when I installed it, it did not light.  Not the manufacturer´s fault, fortunately.  When I checked I discovered that some other consumer had purchased this box, returned it for credit, and had substituted a common 120 volt, 60 watt bulb (value about $0.30) instead of the one that had been in the package originally.  I choose to be generous in attributing this to recessionary pressures.  It has to be tough for some people to pay $4 per light bulb, especially if an RV is their "permanent" home.  Certainly all the harder if they have been hit by a layoff or other kind of job loss.  I can understand a reluctance to "waste" that kind of money on a light bulb, and hope that it is not just a general trend toward a general decline in the morality of the population at large.  

When I was growing up the neighborhood was not very prosperous.  The prospect of a windfall of some lump of money seemed like it would be better than a vacation to Disneyland, but we had too much respect for the law to seriously consider insurance fraud, although rumours that such things existed surfaced occasionally.  But to steal from the local grocery store (never mind take money from the pockets of the family that ran the local corner store) even if that grocery store was part of the Safeway or Loblaws chain was not something that was considered acceptable, and we knew very well that our parents would never tolerate such a thing.  Now, it seems that, "aw, their insured" [against losses], or "they can afford it better than I/we can" seems to be excuse enough for some people. 

If "the people" behave like that, how can they expect to "deserve" any better from their politicians.

Naked Reader

On the one hand I find myself saddened by the fact that this is still unusual enough to be remarked upon, though it also gladdens my heart that at least some people are willing to endure the petty and small-minded criticism that their bravery will draw.  I speak in this instance in praise of actress Kate Winslet´s performance in The Reader.  Yes, there is "bravery" in choosing to play a character that is eventually discovered to be a war criminal, guilty of negligent murder of hundreds of people, and callous to the deaths of hundreds more, but that is the kind of character that great roles are built upon, and she delivers a very moving performance.  Maggie, my wife, put this title on our DVD rental list months ago.  It finally got here this weekend.  This one was worth the wait.

But the bravery I am speaking of in Ms. Winslet´s case is not for the choice of role, but for accepting the portrayal that has her naked or nearly naked for what seems like half of the time she is on screen.  It is brave because so many would be quick to condemn such brazen behavior as immoral.  It is sad, to me, because that is one of the "get over yourselves, you up-tight, old fuddy-duddies" battle for liberalizing North American society that I thought my generation had already won, back in the days of Woodstock, and Hair being accepted on Broadway.  Topless beaches at the Cannes Film Festival still bring out the paparazzi when the tourists flock to that little town once a year, gladly obliging the fresh crop of young starlets seeking a little exposure.  The rest of the year the topless bathers attract only curious tourist cameras.  Topless is just how one dresses for sunbathing and swimming on many if not most French beaches.  Bared chests of both genders are common on British television, or if not "common" then at least not the subject of the kind of national scandal that arose over Janet Jackson´s so-called "wardrobe malfunction" at the Superbowl, which, by the way, exposed almost no flesh at all because the "malfunction" functioned exactly as planned, and her nipples were covered by modesty patches in any case.

It is also "brave" of Ms. Winslet because not many of us look good when altogether naked.  We have come to expect near perfection as a "standard" of beauty, and while Ms. Winslet is a beautiful movie star, her un-retouched body pales in comparison to the Victoria´s Secret models on film.  Thank goodness Ms. Winslet realized that she doesn´t have to have that perfect body before she can expose it onscreen.  It would have been inconsistent with the character, a downtrodden, not-too-bright, former prison guard to have that kind of stunning body beneath the drab smock of her unglamorous, even pitiful, surroundings.  Now, I am not belittling, by any stretch of the imagination (and it almost does stretch the imagination) the incredible "hard-body" appearance of a mature Demi Moore (whether or not she was actually naked) or the fresh, youthful curves of Scarlett Johanssen.  Nor am I advocating that the world needs more frequent doses of Harvey Keitel´s or Dennis Franz´ naked, hairy behinds, but at least if nudity were more common and more commonly accepted, at least those hairy butts would look less … well, "frightening," is the word I am looking for, I guess.

So, hurray for Kate Winslet in more fields than one.

Happy Thoughts

Sometimes things we don´t like can actually turn out to be good things.  In this case, I do not like secrets.  I don´t like secrets because I don´t like not knowing what someone (anyone) else knows.  I also don´t like secrets because I hardly ever have any knowledge of anything that I feel I should "hold close like a treasure" hidden from public view.  I´m a very public person, and I am almost never ashamed of anything I do, or say.  So no "dirty little secrets" for me.  I make it a policy not to lie, although sometimes if my wife, Maggie, elbows me hard enough I can be persuaded to tell a "white lie" to save someone´s feelings from unnecessary hurt.  (Frankly I prefer the advice Bambi´s friend "Thumper" that, "If you can´t say something nice, don´t say anything at all.")

What brought this to mind is that a gentleman I have been talking to recently asked me to send him an email (or two) that did NOT contain any proprietary information so that he could just cut´n´paste from them without fear that he might inadvertently be revealing any proprietary information or secrets.  Sometimes it is nice to have secrets worth keeping.  In this case the mere interest in what I know was flattering.  I think I like secrets a little better than I used to.

Love and warm wishes,

Sincerely,

Stafford "Doc" Williamson

http://daochienergy.com