By Andy May – Re-Blogged From WUWT
The recycling movement started in the 1970s and it has been very popular in Western countries. Participation varies with location, but in our small community of The Woodlands, Texas, over 90% participate in our curbside recycling program. However, the value of recycled materials has fallen dramatically in recent years because far too much unrecyclable material is put in the bins by the public and much of what is recyclable is contaminated with water, food, or other contaminates that make the “good” stuff unusable. Waste disposal companies often charge “contamination fees.” In addition to the contamination problem, the value of recyclables is going down and cost to process them into a usable form is going up. Processing, that is cleaning and sorting a load of recyclable material, has gone from earning a community $25/ton to costing the community $70/ton or more in many areas. In 2015 recycling was a revenue generator for Houston and other cities in the area. Bellaire, for example, generated $12,000 in 2015 from curbside recycling, but in 2017, they lost over $80,000 for the same program.
By Duggan Flanakin – Re-Blogged From WUWT
Instead of cutting forests and burning dung and charcoal, shouldn’t Africa have cheap electricity?
China, India, Vietnam and other nations are using more and more oil, natural gas and coal every year to electrify and modernize their nations, create jobs, and improve their people’s health, living standards and life spans. Why in this day and age are the World Bank and other international institutions demanding widespread use of charcoal for heating and cooking in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA)? Why are African countries, the United States and human rights groups tolerating these lethal policies?
During the recent 2019 “climate week,” the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change touted increased reliance on biomass – which already comprises 60% of European “renewable” energy – as a tool in fighting climate change and stabilizing Earth’s never-stable climate.
By Jeff Thomas – Re-Blogged From International Man
“Trump is doing the right thing. Without him, we have no protection against China. China doesn’t only wish to dominate Asia, but the world.”
Here in Hanoi, so said my dinner companion – a major manufacturer and worldwide exporter of steel products.
He, like so many other major Asian producers, sees an opportunity in international trade for all of Asia to capitalize on.
In the Western world, the argument rages as to whether the US tariff war will benefit the US or not.
The ongoing battle between the United States and China for economic supremacy isn’t only being fought in the gilded ballrooms of Washington, as trade negotiators from either side parry over automobile parts content, intellectual property rights, government subsidies and the like.
Casualties and victories are also borne out over the decks of hulking freighters that carry the commodities which make up the nuts and bolts of international trade.
Indeed, shipping statistics are often sought by economics and traders trying to predict the health of a country’s economy or the world economy. The Baltic Dry Index (BDI) is one such leading indicator. Another is the Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI). PMIs are a monthly survey of supply chain managers across 19 industries. An economy with a PMI of over 50 is considered to be growing; under 50 means an economy is treading water or possibly drowning.
By Thomson Reuters – Re-Blogged From Newsmax
President Donald Trump said on Sunday he would delay an increase in U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods thanks to “productive” trade talks and that he and Chinese President Xi Jinping would meet to seal a deal if progress continued.
The announcement was the clearest sign yet that China and the United States are closing in on a deal to end a months-long trade war that has slowed global growth and disrupted markets.
Trump had planned to raise tariffs to 25 percent from 10 percent on $200 billion worth of Chinese imports into the United States if an agreement between the world’s two largest economies were not reached by Friday.
By AFP – Re-Blogged From Newsmax
China has for the first time landed several bombers on an island in the disputed South China Sea, a move that could provoke renewed tensions between countries bordering the strategically vital maritime region.
Several bombers of various types — including the long-range, nuclear strike capable H-6K — carried out landing and take off drills at an unidentified island airfield after carrying out simulated strike training on targets at sea, the Chinese airforce said in a statement Friday.
Re-Blogged From Stratfor
Since China began its extensive land reclamation program in the South China Sea in 2013, Beijing has focused on improving its presence and infrastructure at seven locations in the Spratly Island chain: Cuarteron Reef, Fiery Cross, Gaven, Hughes, Johnson, Mischief and Subi reefs.
By Jim Willie – Re-Blogged From http://www.Gold-Eagle.com
China is working a strategy with the Saudis. Since the last months of 2017, the Jackass has been firm that the ARAMCO deal for IPO stock introduction might never occur. And if it did, then Hong Kong might be the only location for the IPO launch. It seems that disclosure and transparency is non-existent to this Arab kingdom. Now the stock listing might be in Riyadh and nowhere else. Imagine the risk to brokerage houses if the truth comes out, that the Saudi oil reserves are only 20% to 40% of the disclosed amount, a grand lie and deep fraud. Such will not stop China from investing privately in ARAMCO, since it would serve two purposes. It would enable huge diverse participation in the Saudi Economy, which contains a second treasure trove of minerals. It would enable the Chinese to purchase Saudi oil in RMB terms for payment. In the last month, the Russians confirmed an equally sized investment stake in ARAMCO. If the Chinese sit on the ARAMCO board of directors, they will surely convince the Saudis to alter the payment method in approval. It could be a primary part of the deal.
By Mark O’Byrne – Re-Blogged From http://www.Silver-Phoenix500.com
Trade war between two superpowers continues to escalate
– White House likely to impose steep tariffs on aluminium and steel imports on ‘national security grounds’
– US may impose global tariff of at least 24% on imports of steel and 7.7% on aluminium
– China “will certainly take necessary measures to protect our legitimate rights.”
– China is USA’s largest trading partner, fastest-growing market for U.S. exports, 3rd largest market for U.S. exports in the world.
Re-Blogged From Newsmax
President Donald Trump on Sunday offered to mediate in the South China Sea disputes, while his Chinese counterpart played down concerns over Beijing’s military buildup and the prospects of war in the contested waters.
Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke separately about the territorial rifts ahead of an annual summit of Southeast Asian nations that also includes the U.S., China and other global players. The disputes are expected to get the spotlight at the summit, along with the North Korean nuclear threat and terrorism.
The long-simmering disputes are one issue where the two major powers’ influence, focus and military might have been gauged, with the U.S. and China both calling for a peaceful resolution but taking contrasting positions in most other aspects of the conflict.
By tonytran2015 (Melbourne, Australia) – Re-Blogged From https://survivaltricks.wordpress.com
Understanding the Concept of Allying to Distant Powers to Subjugate Immediate Neighbours.
Contrary to Westerners’ impression, China is not ruled by successive descendents of an Empire founder for thousands of years. Actually, there are many successive empires in China, each killing all eligible inheritors and most officials of the previous empire to grab its power and to prevent its resurgence. The new empire then restored and continued to use most Citadels built by the previous empire.
Except for a short period of the Zhao dynasty (who ruled by being virtuous but was therefore bullied by their own followers), whatever empire occupying the Central Citadel always practice Allying to Distant Powers to Subjugate Immediate Neighbours.
1. The central empire state and its surrounding vassal states.
The ruling Emperor always had to award his contributing followers while keeping them under control.
The empire is carved into many vassal states (each is a miniature copy of the central state but having to pay annual tributes to the Emperor) awarded hereditarily to the contributing followers of the emperor. The vassal states sometimes wage wars among themselves, their boundaries are not fixed but always change due to wars/feuds between their rulers. Sometimes the Emperor has to intervene to stop wars among his vassal states.
The ancestors (in name, but not biologically) of the founder of the Qin Empire were followers of the Zhao emperors and had been awarded the vassal state of Qin, but they successfully bullied the Zhao Emperors to gradually rob their land and their throne.
2. Allying to Distant Powers to Subjugate Immediate Neighbours (within the empire).
The desire is understandable. Chinese history has shown many stories of rebellion by trusted officials to steal the Emperor’s throne and wives.
On a national level, each emperor let his most trusted generals be the rulers of distant non-prosperous vassal states. The distant governors have no chance of becoming more powerful than the Emperor, but they can be recalled to subdue any rebellious official in the Emperor’s court.
3. Allying to Distant Powers to Subjugate Immediate Neighbours (on international level).
There are times when the central state of the empire is threatened by another stronger empire/nation (for examples the Huns Nomades, the Kim empire (a predecessor of the current North Korea ruled by Kim Jong Un), the Mongolian Empire of Ghanghi Khan, the Manchurian Empire.)
In that case, the Enperor will pretend to find new markets and send trade emissaries to third (and maybe fourth and fifth) countries behind the back of the undesirably strong neighbour. Trade talks with those countries may soon become secret talks of alliance for double thronged attacks on the undesirably strong neighbour ! The spoils of wars will be divided among “allies” according to their contributions.
It is known that 2000 years ago, China has reached distant countries like Persia, various non-united nomadic countries in Siberia. The purpose was not purely for trading. It was to keep open the possibilities for alliance against immediate neighbours of the empire.
Vietnam (Annam in Chinese history) was never a Chinese land and has revolted against Chinese occupations. China used to ally itself with the Southern neighbours of Vietnam (Champa some 400 years ago, and Khmer Rouge recently) for many plans for double pronged attack on Vietnam.
India is a Southern neighbour of China. The method calls for an alliance with Sri Lanka and provoking wars between the two harmonious neighbours India and Sri Lanka.
Burma has a common boundary with China. Its national cohesion is declining. The country would be a suitable candidate for application of China’s all three policies of Forever Expanding, Strike-then-Consolate, Allying to Distant Powers to Subjugate Immediate Neighbours. A suitable ally for China would be some revolting Minorities in the South (see ).
North Korea is a neighbour of China but historically had fought against China. Its is always on guard against China surprise overrun (Tibet typed operation). China makes pressure on it by opening trade with its Capitalist opponent South Korea. China may also ally with the US to attack and occupy North Korea at some convenient time. Territorial gains would have to be kept by China as the huge occupation army would logically be Chinese. (This whole paragraph was written before 05 April 2017 and publish before the meeting between US and Chinese leaders in 06 April 2017. Events after publication date now unfold almost exactly along these predictions.)
By Fred Reed – Re-Blogged From http://www.lewrockwell.com
[The military’s budget has room to cut, so it’s an Economic issue. This writer makes it more personal – maybe too personal. -Bob]
Those who try to understand military policy often confuse themselves by focusing on minor matters such as strategy, tactics, logistics, and armament. Here they err. For years the central goal of the military, the brass ring, has been independence from control by civilians. It has been achieved.
In time of war, the first concern of the command is to limit the flow of information to their publics. The actions of the enemy are an important but secondary consideration. Thus militaries strive to prevent the dissemination of photos of mutilated soldiers or, as in Washington today, of governmentally tortured prisoners. In the United States, which characteristically fights wars unrelated to the safety of the country, the Pentagon must also keep soldiers from being told that they are being sacrifice for the benefit of arms manufacturers and imperialist ambitions. In wars before Vietnam, this was adroitly effected. You could go to jail for criticizing a war.
In Vietnam, something new happened. The press covered the war freely. Reporters went where they pleased, beyond the control of the military. Their publications ran the results. National magazines printed horrific photographs of what was really happening.
Truth tells. The coverage was one of the two factors that forced Washington to quit the war. The other was the passionate unwillingness of young men to be forced to fight a war in which they had no interest. The war, a source of meaning for Washington’s thunderous hawks and fern-bar Napoleons, was getting them killed.