Australian election upcoming

In nine days, Australia is having a federal election. Based on polls, it seems more likely than not that John Howard – the Conservative Prime Minister – will lose to Kevin Rudd of the Labor Party.

Both Nature and The Economist have commented upon the election in general and the importance of climate change as an issue within it. Up to now, Australia has been one of the least cooperative countries in the world, when it comes to the international regulation of greenhouse gasses. That might change to a considerable extent under Labor leadership.

Disgusting situation in Saudi Arabia

In case anyone needs to be reminded about the awfulness of some world governments, here is a story about a rape victim in Saudi Arabia being sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in jail for being in the car of a non-family member. The seven rapists received sentences ranging from one to five years.

This is the kind of thing that should produce serious and public condemnation from governments that are actually serious about human rights and the rule of law. The combination of theocracy, patriarchy, and vindictiveness that created and enforces these laws has no place in any legitimate society.

On Ethiopia and birth rates

Place de Portage atrium, Gatineau

This week’s issue of The Economist includes a briefing on Ethiopia. In many ways, it reflects the ideas I am reading in Paul Collier’s The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It.. A bad neighbourhood, terrible governance, ethnic conflict, persistent poverty and poor quality of life indicators persist despite western aid and loans from China. It seems probable that Ethiopia is caught in one or more of the poverty ‘traps’ that Jeffrey Sachs, Collier, and others have written about.

What struck me most about the article, however, was the demographics. In order to keep unemployment constant, Ethiopia needs to generate hundreds of thousands of new jobs a year. This is because the average woman in Ethiopia will have seven children in the course of her life. On the basis of such growth, the population could rise from about 75 million now to over 140 million by 2050. While it is possible that such a spectacular rate of population growth is the product of free and voluntary choices, it seems more plausible that it reflects a lack of personal control over reproduction: especially on the part of women. It is both ethical and prudent to redress this balance in favour of women having more control of their reproductive lives.

Statistics suggest that such control is less common in poorer places. This scatter plot shows the relationship between GDP per capita and total fertility rate in 108 countries. The replacement rate of about 2.1 births per woman corresponds to a mean GDP per capita of about $10,000 (though countries with a wide range of incomes can be found with similar TFRs). This data doesn’t necessarily show anything causal. It neither confirms or denies that poverty causes high birth rates or, conversely, that high birth rates cause poverty. Nonetheless, it is suggestive of the fact that women have less control over reproduction in poorer places.

A sustainable world is probably one with a birth rate below the natural rate of replenishment. This is not true indefinitely, but only until the combination of total human population and total human impact upon natural systems can be indefinitely sustained. While people obviously should not be forced to reduce their fecundity by governments, their right to choose whether or not to have children should be upheld and made meaningful through policies such as the legality and availability of contraception. In 1994, the International Conference on Population and Development defined sexual and reproductive health as:

A state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and…not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, in all matters relating to the reproductive system and to its functions and processes. Reproductive health therefore implies that people are able to have a satisfying and safe sex life and that they have the capability to reproduce and the freedom to decide if, when and how often to do so. Implicit in this last condition are the right of men and women to be informed and to have access to safe, effective, affordable and acceptable methods of family planning of their choice, as well as other methods of their choice for regulation of fertility which are not against the law, and the right of access to appropriate health-care services that will enable women to go safely through pregnancy and childbirth and provide couples with the best chance of having a healthy infant.

Sexual politics have always been a terribly contentious area, but that doesn’t mean reasonable people should not be agitating for better recognition and implementation of sexual rights. The United Nations Population Fund has a good website linking to more information on reproductive rights.

Quebec rejects corn ethanol

Having decided in 2005 to authorize a corn-fed ethanol plant in Varennes, the government of Quebec has now officially said that corn ethanol has no future in the province. While the future use of alternative feedstocks is not ruled out, the Quebec Minister for Natural Resources have said that this pilot plant will be the last of its kind. An article in the Montreal Gazette supports the idea that “[b]acking away from ethanol makes sense.”

This is a good thing for a number of reasons. To begin with, ethanol made from corn probably doesn’t have any positive environmental effects. It takes as much oil to grow the corn, make the ethanol, and distribute it as it would have taken to power the ethanol cars in the first place. As such, the effect of using corn ethanol on greenhouse gas emissions is negligible. Furthermore, intensive corn agriculture has problems of its own. Pesticide use peppers the environment with toxins – including persistent organic pollutants. Fertilizer runoff causes the eutrophication of rivers and algae blooms in the sea.

Wherever a sustainable future for transportation energy lies, it is not with ethanol made from corn.

Farewell to horns

Cosmic bowling

This blog has previously mentioned the process of ‘fishing down’ marine food webs: you start with big delicious predator species (tuna, salmon, etc) and fish them to local extinction. Then, you catch smaller and less tasty things until the area of sea contains only plankton and jellyfish. This is a rational thing to do in the right circumstances: where access to a certain area of sea is free and unrestricted, and where everyone else is driving the resource towards destruction anyway. The best you can do individually is cash in while you can, since the resource is getting destroyed anyhow.

It seems that something similar is happening in relation to horns used for traditional Chinese medicine. Back in 1991, conservationists concerned about the decimation of rhino populations for medicinal purposes tried to encourage the use of Saiga Antelope (Saiga tatarica) horn instead. The World Wildlife Fund tried to encourage pharmacists to substitute the horns of the less endangered antelopes for those of the more endangered rhinos. Now, antelope populations in Russia and Kazakhstan have fallen from over 1,000,000 to just 30,000 (a 97% decline).

Switching from the unrestrained usage of one resource to the unrestrained usage of another just shifts the focus of the damage being caused. In order to create sustainable outcomes, restraint must be enforced either through economic means or regulation.

As an aside, there does seem to be some scope for reducing the horn trade by reducing demand through education. While horn is apparently an effective remedy for fever (though less good than available drugs not made from endangered species), the idea that it is an effective aphrodisiac can be countered. The rigid appearance of horn hardly makes it likely that it actually has chemical aphrodisiac properties, though it may strengthen the placebo effect already bolstered by general reverence for tradition. Apparently, the advent of Viagra has reduced prices and demand for rhino horn as well as seal and tiger penises that have traditionally been employed (though less effectively) to the same end.

Simple, tasty stir-fry

I made an unusually tasty stir-fry for dinner tonight, inspired by the culinary prowess of my cousins. Contained therein, in order of addition:

  • Olive oil (a good dollop)
  • Garlic (four cloves, diced)
  • Ginger (volume similar to a whole head of garlic, diced)
  • Tofu (firm, cubed)
  • Yellow onion (one large, chopped)
  • Red onion (one large, chopped)
  • Mushrooms (about 20)
  • Yams (2 small, pre-microwaved)
  • Green pepper (two, chopped)
  • Carrots (three large, chopped)
  • Soy sauce (about 70mL)
  • Olive oil (a few tablespoons)
  • Sesame oil (about a tablespoon)
  • Kidney beans (500mL canned)
  • Hot sauce (to taste)

The instructions are absurdly simple: add ingredients to wok in sequence. Cook at high heat until cooked. I chopped the garlic, ginger, onions, and mushrooms before starting. Three minutes of microwave pre-cooking means you won’t be waiting forever for the yams; the carrots should still be pleasantly crunchy at the end. The ingredients described above fill four medium-sized Tupperware containers and one hungry stomach.

The only ingredient I hadn’t used before was the sesame oil. It makes a big difference, both in terms of taste and smell.

PS. I was given twelve cans of chick peas as an early birthday gift. Any recipe ideas?

Treating malaria

Vegetable stir fry

Legend has it that the gin and tonic cocktail evolved to provide the administrators of the British Empire with both ethanol and quinine. The former would keep them happy, and the latter would help keep malaria-carrying mosquitos at bay. In the present day, chloroquinine is still a common treatment for malaria. At 20-40 cents a dose, it is dramatically cheaper than the more effective alternative: a drug called artemisinin which is derived from the Artemisia annua shrub. A course of artemisinin treatment costs between $5 and $7 – too much for many people in the developing world.

Also problematic is how using artemisinin-only treatments will rapidly lead to drug resistance in mosquito populations. Mutations that confer advantages against a particular compound are relatively common, and are strongly selected for by evolution once they occur. It is much less likely that a malarial parasite will evolve both resistance to artemisinin and to a drug used in combination before one compound or the other kills it. As such, artemisinin combination therapies (ACTs) are the preferred treatment. These are somewhat more expensive, at $6 to$10 for a course of treatment.

Several organizations are trying to tackle the cost issue. In particular, the World Bank and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation are cooperating on a scheme called the Affordable Medicines Facility-malaria (AMFm). Given that malaria continues to kill 1-3 million people per year – and sicken between 400 and 900 million – such efforts are to be applauded and encouraged.

Back in rainy Ottawa

After an excellent weekend in Toronto visiting family and Tristan, I am back in Ottawa – reheating my apartment from its emission-reducing occupant absence chill. This is one of those calculations that is so difficult, when it comes to minimizing one’s carbon footprint: does it take less power to let your flat cool for three days and then heat it up again, or just to maintain the temperature across that span of time. I haven’t done the thermodynamic calculations, but my intuition suggests that cooling and re-heating is the better option.

Time spent enjoying the culinary skills of some of my cousins has encouraged me to buy some unfamiliar ingredients and see what havoc I can wreak before becoming competent in their use. The activity may help to offset the ever-diminishing prospects for cycling in this darkening city.

Some nuclear facts and figures

First Nations art

The first nuclear reactor to generate electricity was the EBR-1 experimental reactor in Arco, Idaho. Previously, reactors had only been used to produce materials for the military: especially plutonium for bombs of the kind dropped on Nagasaki on 9 August 1945. Four years after the EBR-1 reactor became operational (producing a paltry 100 kilowatts of power), it became the first nuclear reactor to suffer a partial meltdown.

The contemporary nuclear industry includes 439 nuclear reactors worldwide, producing 6.5% of the world’s energy and 15.7% of the world’s electricity. According to the International Atomic Energy Organization, 31 different countries operate reactors. Two countries – France and Japan – produce 57% of the world’s nuclear power, with nuclear producing 80% of all French usage. In terms of sheer output, the United States produces more nuclear power than anyone else in the world. US nuclear output in 2005 was about 406 terawatt-hours. They also have the largest and safest nuclear navy (Russia has had 18 serious nuclear accidents on subs, producing seven sinkings and 241 deaths).

As far back as 1952, a Presidential commission (The President’s Materials Policy Commission) produced a pessimistic report on the prospects of nuclear power for electrical generation, suggesting that money be devoted to solar power research instead. Now, the combination of concerns about energy security and concerns about climate change is prompting a possible re-birth within the industry. Here is a map showing who is considering new nuclear facilities.

It would certainly be useful to know the true price of nuclear power, as well as whether anyone will actually open a geological storage depot for spent fuel in coming years.

Remembrance Day

Remembrance Day is a fundamentally problematic holiday. On the one hand, it is meant to recognize the awfulness of war. On the other, it is meant to glorify those on our side who participated in wars. A truly pacifist holiday might be more easily palatable, but it would doubtless arise the ire of those who served in past conflicts and those who recognize the righteousness of at least some of them.

Wars can be divided into three categories:

  1. Those fought for reasons of immediate self defence (i.e. the Polish defence efforts when both Russia and Germany attacked at the outset of the Second World War).
  2. Wars fought for purposes that we can generally recognize as morally admirable now (the defence of the innocent).
  3. Wars fought for purposes we know consider immoral (territorial gain, the elimination of ethnic groups, etc).

What arises in response to this categorization is the question of to what degree those today can judge the wars on the past on the basis of contemporary ideas of morality. If Canada’s participation in the First World War was essentially in defence of imperialism, does our subsequent belief that imperialism is an unacceptable aim alter how we should feel about the war? Secondly, there is the matter of the individual evaluations of soldiers. If soldiers have no responsibility for assessing the rightness or wrongness of the war they are in, we are obliged to honour the Nazi machine-gun operator defending Juno Beach as much as the Canadians storming it. If soldiers are responsible for assessing the morality of the wars they participate in, we cannot simply honour them as a block.

When you move beyond crude patriotism to an ethic of equal human worth, it becomes very difficult to continue to accept war memorials at face value.