Archive for October, 2009

Yoani Sanchez: In Cuba Power Only "Debates" With Itself [VIDEO]

I do not know where to begin to tell what happened in the debate about the Internet that took place yesterday, organized by the magazine Temas. Undoubtedly, the blonde wig I put on allowed me to slip through the controlled entrance of the Fresa y Chocolate Cultural Center. That and high heels, lipstick, shiny earrings and an enormous, painfully-bright purse, transformed me into someone sufficiently different. Some friends came to tell me that I looked better like that, with a tightly-fitted short dress, a sexy walk and square-framed glasses. My apologies to them, the person whose role I acted didn’t last long and today I’ve returned to my disheveled and boring appearance.

They didn’t allow Claudia, Reinaldo, Eugenio, Ciro and other bloggers to enter. “The institution reserves the right of admission,” and my cyberspace colleagues showed the impertinence of those who have already been excluded from other places, but didn’t want to retreat, embarrassed and in silence. Inside, I managed to find a seat next to the panel of speakers. Some adroit eyes had already detected my reedy physiognomy and a camera filmed me with the insistence of one preparing a dossier.

A young writer asked to speak and lamented that so many had been prevented from entering; then someone came and mentioned terms such as “enemy,” “dangerous,” and “defend ourselves.” When finally I was called, I took the opportunity to ask what relationship there is between the limitations in bandwidth and the many websites censored for the Cuban public. There was applause when I finished. I swear I didn’t collude with any of them. Afterward, a university professor came up and questioned why I had received the Ortega y Gasset journalism prize. I still haven’t managed to find the relationship between my question and her analysis, but the paths of defamation are so twisted. At the end, several came up to me to give me hugs, one woman gave me just a touch of her hand and said “congratulations.” The crisp October night waited for me outside.

If all those not allowed access had managed to participate, that would have been a true space for debate about the web. What happened felt withered and shackled. Only one of the speakers mentioned concepts such as Web 2.0, social networks and Wikipedia. The rest was the anticipated vaccine against the perverse web, the repeated justifications for why Cubans cannot access it en masse. I took my phone and quickly Tweeted, “I think it would be best to organize another debate about the Internet, without the burden of censorship and exclusion.” This morning, with dark circles from having slept only three hours, I was delivering technical manuals in the second session of our Blogger Academy.

Some of the images in this video were taken by friendly hands in solidarity and are from inside the room.

Yoani’s blog, Generation Y, can be read here in English translation.

Michael Brune: How Trudie Styler Is Winning Hearts and Minds at … Chevron?

As Joe Berlinger’s Crude continues to rack up favorable reviews, a captivating email back-and-forth has been revealed between Trudie Styler and executives at Chevron, the oil giant which has been facing increasing criticism for neglecting to clean up more than 1,000 contaminated sites in Ecuador.

Several weeks ago, Styler made an offer to buy tickets to Crude for all Chevron employees, saying that:

Many people will assume that you and I must be on different sides of the fence on this issue. But I don’t believe that. I’m willing to bet that you and I, and all of your colleagues, agree that everyone has the fundamental right to the life-supporting elements of clean air and clean water.

Chevron struck back the following week, applauding Styler’s “commitment to provide the Ecuadorian people with access to clean water and a better quality of life,” before stating:

What is being missed, even by well-intentioned people like Ms. Styler, is that the responsibility for the lack of potable water, insufficient access to proper health care, and malnutrition now affecting the people of the Oriente lies squarely with the government of Ecuador, which has failed to properly address these serious challenges for nearly two decades.

Earlier this month, Styler wrote once again to Chevron’s rank-and-file. Here’s her letter in full:

Dear friends,

Thank you for your messages of support and for taking the time to watch the film Crude.

I am aware that you received an email from Chevron executives last week in response to my invitation. It’s encouraging that the management of your company recognizes that the people of the Oriente in Ecuador are enduring severe assaults on their health. At the same time, I’m dismayed to read that management will not take any responsibility for the mess that has been left behind.

I understand that in the middle of a highly public and contentious lawsuit it can be difficult for Chevron’s executives to speak candidly. However, last week’s note was particularly disappointing, as your company’s leadership passed on an opportunity for reconciliation. I continue to believe Chevron can do the right thing in Ecuador, but only when it acknowledges the mistakes the company inherited when it acquired Texaco.

Let me highlight three very simple points for your consideration:

• In last week’s letter, Chevron’s management wrote, “When Texaco left Ecuador nearly two decades ago, it did so only after having responsibly cleaned up its share of oil operations…” If you were to witness what I have seen, you would know this just isn’t true. During its time in Ecuador, Texaco built more than 900 unlined waste pits throughout the Amazon region. In judicial inspections of 102 of these sites, 100% of them – each and every one – were found to be contaminated. In fact, the court expert found that even those sites that Chevron’s management says were remediated are as contaminated as those that were never touched.

• As you know, when oil is extracted it has two components, the marketable crude and waste waters, which are often highly toxic. The common practice for decades has been to re-inject the toxic waste waters into underground wells, to avoid extensive contamination of the local water and soil. Texaco never did this in Ecuador, despite re-injecting waste waters at other operations around the world during the same time period and even owning a patent on the technology. Billions of gallons of these poisons were thus dumped into waterways over more than two decades. It is unethical to have one set of practices in countries with close environmental scrutiny, and an entirely different standard when no one is watching.

• Confronting the burden of years of contamination, Chevron’s management asserted in its letter last week that, “There is no scientific or medical evidence to support claims of increased cancer risk in the region.” Forgive me, but that is a bold and irresponsible statement. If Mr. O’Reilly ever visited families in the area, he’d have more evidence than he’d care to see. A team of technical professionals led by an independent expert appointed by the court has estimated 1401 cancer deaths have been caused by contamination and has confirmed a significant correlation between a series of other adverse health impacts and proximity to the contaminated areas. Other peer-reviewed scientific studies show elevated rates of sudden miscarriages, genetic disorders, and elevated instances of childhood leukemia linked to oil contamination regionally. You can view one of the peer-reviewed studies for yourself at: http://chevrontoxico.com/assets/docs/childhood-leukemia.pdf.

Here’s why I am writing to you. I do not wish to engage in a he-said, she-said exchange with your company’s executives, certainly not over email! However, it’s important that you hear an independent account of what is really happening in Ecuador. I sincerely believe that Chevron could set a model for corporate responsibility for the entire world, but only if it takes a fresh look at a long-standing problem.

I understand your company has a new CEO, John Watson, coming on board next year. Perhaps this presents an historic opportunity to open up a new line of dialogue so we can work together to help alleviate the suffering of Ecuador’s people. In the meantime, please continue to lend us your support. Thank you.

Trudie Styler

More on Wash Post

Russell Poldrack: Multitasking: The Brain Seeks Novelty

This is my first blog post for the Huffington Post, so let me start by introducing myself. I’m a neuroscientist at the University of Texas at Austin, where I use brain imaging to study how the human mind achieves its amazing feats and why it sometimes fails. In this blog I plan to focus on how neuroscience and psychology can provide us with clues about how to live better, focusing on topics related to multitasking and information overload.

I will start by admitting up front that I am an information junkie. Try as I might, it’s difficult for me to make it through an hour-long meeting without peeking at my iPhone at least once to check my email, and I have, on more than one occasion, come close to hurling myself down the stairs as I try to read emails while descending. Why would I do things that place me in such clear social and physical peril? Part of the answer lies in the brain’s response to novelty.

The brain is built to ignore the old and focus on the new. Marketers clearly understand this: If you watch closely, you will notice that heavily-played television ads will change ever so slightly after being on the air for a few weeks. When this change is detected by the brain, our attention is drawn to the ad, oftentimes without us even realizing it. Novelty is probably one of the most powerful signals to determine what we pay attention to in the world. This makes a lot of sense from an evolutionary standpoint, since we don’t want to spend all of our time and energy noticing the many things around us that don’t change from day to day.

Researchers have found that novelty causes a number of brain systems to become activated, and foremost among these is the dopamine system. This system, which lives deep in the brain stem, sends the neurotransmitter dopamine to locations across the brain. Many people incorrectly think of dopamine as the “feel-good” neurotransmitter because drugs that create euphoria, such as cocaine and methamphetamine, cause an increase of dopamine in particular parts of the brain. However, a growing body of research shows that dopamine is more like the “gimme more” neurotransmitter.

Some of the most interesting research on this topic has been done by Kent Berridge and his colleagues at the University of Michigan. In this research, they videotape rats and then measure how often the rats exhibit signs of pleasure; some wonderful video of these “affective reactions” can be found at Berridge’s web site. Their research has shown that blocking dopamine in the brain doesn’t affect how often the rats exhibit these pleasure responses. Instead, it reduces the rats’ motivation, turning them into rodent slackers. Another neurotransmitter system in the brain, the opiod system, seems to be the one that actually produces the pleasurable sensations, thought it too has very close relations with the dopamine system.

Another interesting fact about dopamine is that nearly every drug that people abuse has an effect on the dopamine system (as do chocolate, money, sex, and many other addictive things). Again, the role of dopamine is not in the pleasure that one may get from the drug, but in establishing the craving that keeps one coming back for more, even after the drug has lost its pleasurable effects.
A final important fact about dopamine is that it is very much involved in learning and memory. Learning and memory occur in the brain through changes in the way that neurons connect to one another. We know that the brain is very “plastic,” meaning that it can change drastically with experience. However, the brain needs some way to control these changes; after all, we wouldn’t want our entire visual system to be rewired to see upside down after doing a single handstand. Dopamine is one of the neurotransmitters that controls this: When dopamine is released, it is a signal to the brain that is it now time to start learning what is going on.

So what does this all have to do with my iPhone? Well, it’s hard to imagine a more powerful novelty-generating device than this little 4.8-ounce hunk of metal and glass. Every time it buzzes to signal a new email or text message, it is wiring even more firmly into my brain the desire to pick up the device and look for that precious nugget of new information (which usually turns out to be something completely mundane, like a reminder of another committee meeting). Although there is not yet any published research on this, I am confident that we will soon see that our bond to these devices works through the same mechanisms in the brain that govern addiction to drugs, food, and many other things.

Given all of this, what can we do to prevent ourselves from becoming novelty-seeking zombies? The first thing is to simply become mindful of one’s use of media and devices. I find that one of the best things to do is to institute regular vacations from email. It usually takes a couple of days for the itch to check my email every five minutes to go away, and watching it happen reminds me just how obsessed I can become, but it also shows that it’s possible to lead a perfectly normal and fulfilling life without constant email access. Once we see that we can live without constant access to our devices, we can start trying to exert some control over device use in our daily lives. Evolution gave us the ability to overcome our urges, but we have to have the will to employ this control. One bit of good news is that we can improve our self-control with practice; more on that in a future post.

More on The Balanced Life

Kevin Grandia: Solar Power Boss to Announce "A Solar Bill of Rights"

It has always baffled me as to why the renewable energy industry has never really pushed back on the fossil fuel sector’s major lobby and misinformation efforts; but by the looks of a speech to be delivered tomorrow by the head of the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), the gloves are finally coming off.

In an advanced copy of his speech (obtained by yours truly) to be given tomorrow morning to the Solar Power International Conference in Anaheim, California, the CEO and President of the SEIA, Rohne Resch will call for a “solar bill of rights.”

All we seek is the freedom to compete, and all consumers want is the freedom to choose their energy source.  Instead, the full promise of solar power is being restrained by the tyranny of policies that protect our competitors, subsidize wealthy polluters and disadvantage green entrepreneurs.

And Americans know better than anyone else in the world that there’s only one way to overcome tyranny—by declaring our rights and fighting for them with a united and determined voice. 

That is why, today, SEIA is asking you to enlist in the fight to secure a policy environment that allows solar to compete and empowers consumers to choose.

So let’s make today solar’s Fourth of July —the day we declare our independence from policies that prevent greater use of solar energy which Americans so urgently need. 

Today, we’re declaring a Solar Bill of Rights.

The clean energy sector fights an unfair battle against the artificially cheap electricity produced from dirty fuels like coal. A recent report by the Environmental Law Institute found that the fossil fuel sector receives about $70 billion fro taxpayers in the form of subsidies every year, the renewable sector gets only about $12 billion.

Next time you hear a coal executive or one of his lobbyist tell you that coal is cheap and solar remains too expensive, remember that renewables have been forced to compete on an unfair playing field. One of the reasons for this unfair playing field has been that the clean energy sector has never been too good at playing hardball, while the coal and oil companies can play Congress with their eyes closed.

It’s good to see Resche and the SEIA stepping up to the plate because as Reshce wil rightly tell the crowd tomorrow, “the solar industry differs from our competitors not in status but in substance.  We are an industry in ascent; they are sectors in decline.  Our source is clean and limitless; theirs are toxic and scarce.”

More on Sustainability

Carol Hoenig: The Buying and Selling of Andy Warhol

It wasn’t until Benjamin Genocchio’s review of the Norman Rockwell showing at the Nassau County Museum of Art that I began to see the artist in a different, perhaps more disturbing, light. What a disappointment, since I usually find something charming in Rockwell’s work. I own a print of his Girl at the Mirror, and cannot look at it without smiling, since something about the piece touches my core. Long ago, I had the print framed, even though the reproduction has no value in the art world–a world that is foreign to me.

With that in mind, I admit that I am not the best person to write about the subject and that is all the more apparent to me after having read Richard Polsky’s, i sold Andy Warhol. (too soon) –(Other Press). Besides being an entertaining writer, Polsky cofounded Acme Art and is a private dealer who refers to paintings as “real estate.” His memoir takes the reader on a wild ride about the business of buying and selling this real estate, where one must learn how to play it cool, even when millions of dollars are at stake. Early on, Polsky writes,

It used to be all about the art world: visiting artists in their studios, socializing with collectors, and hanging out at art fairs with your fellow dealers. Now, it was all about the art market.

Anyone who is familiar with Polsky’s story may have read his 2003 memoir, I Bought Andy Warhol, which is about his twelve-year search to buy Warhol’s Fright Wig. Twelve years is a long time and it is stunning to discover that after succeeding in his endeavor, two years later Polsky went on to sell the Warhol.

For what it’s worth, while reading Polsky’s memoir, I began to pay closer attention to news stories that dealt with a world in which I have little understanding. There was a snippet in a recent New York Times about Sotheby’s not wanting to tell government regulators about the executives’ bonuses because Christie’s would then take the information to entice the executives to their auction house. And then there was the article that received attention about how Tate Modern would have to destroy about 12,000 catalogs for its exhibition because the nude photo of a young Brooke Shields was pulled from the show. I’m not sure if this would have made the papers had it not been about Brooke Shields, but it certainly created issues for the Tate.

As for the Genocchio review, I couldn’t help but consider what he said about Rockwell:

The artist always seems to be selling something, be it optimism during a time of hardship, patriotism in wartime, or any number of products for which he created seductive illustrations for magazine advertisements.

He has a point and I wonder if Rockwell’s works were objects from an artist who sold out or was he really inspired by the times? Maybe both.

The only piece of art I own that is worth anything, monetarily speaking, is a drawing that Peter Max did for me on a cloth napkin while we were having dinner together a few years ago. He also gave me a personalized, signed poster. He usually personalizes all his books and posters, refusing to give just a signature. The reason being, he sees how much they go for on eBay and figures he should be the one making the profit off his signature instead of autograph hounds. Either way, I have no intention of selling his gifts to me. As for Rockwell’s Girl at the Mirror, that too will always have special meaning, even if the artist was selling something other than inspiration.

As a novice who will quite likely never raise a paddle at an auction, art is a matter of what moves me, and if I spent twelve years trying to get my hands on a work, I doubt I would let it go anytime soon, which makes Polsky’s story all that more intriguing. I suppose, though, whether it is the artist, the work, or a dealer, someone always seems to be selling or buying and, dare I say, diminishing how a piece can touch one’s very soul.

Laura Baudo Sillerman: A Jersey Girl and the Poet Springsteen

This story about a rock star begins with a crumb bun. Well, a crumb muffin. I came down to breakfast this morning and there was a crumb muffin on the counter. Reader, I know you, like me, would never take a bite of that muffin, but that one big crumb on top that looked as though it would fall off if given just enough encouragement. How about that? Of course, to save the counter from the messiness of it all, you are duty bound to pluck that crumb and plop it on your tongue.

And with that morsel of remembrance and this week’s New York Times, the journey to Giants Stadium and the last Springsteen concert to be played in its doomed walls begins. The crumb had a hard and mixed sweetness, the taste of so many mornings back when I was growing up in New Jersey, when my weary factory worker dad would celebrate Saturdays by getting up at 7 a.m. instead of 6, and driving to the Newark bakery he favored.

By the time I rose there would be the aroma of coffee, the scent of bacon and the seduction of crumb cake in the kitchen, and we would have our only time alone all week. Country music on the cardboard radio (it’s here in my office as I write), 75 watts of un-recessed lighting above us and dad whistling as he fried the eggs in butter — as deft as a dancer, and as light on his feet as he wasn’t on the scales or in his heart.

Bruce Springsteen played the last concert ever to be played in Giants Stadium on Friday, October 9. The Stadium is slated for demolition this year. In Monday’s Times the discerning Jon Pareles wrote reverently of the moment without reviewing the music at all. That’s as it should be, because even those of us who weren’t there know the music was ancillary to the event though probably anthemic and pitch perfect. It had to be all about the words and therein lies the confluence of memory and one man’s songs and the irony of it all as well.

For the rest of the country, Jersey is a long-running joke about refineries, highway exits, the mob and worse. Conan O’Brien has condensed the whole state into a mockery of a decaying Newark and its failed dreams. (The genial and brilliant Ivy-league educated Mayor Booker is holding his own in presenting the real picture.) New Jersey is synonymous with inarticulateness, with rage, with ugly belching tanks and endless macadam. And yet night after night 75,000 people have packed its largest arena to listen to the poetry of a man who speaks for them with a plain spoken eloquence, to listen to the modern-day equivalent of that other Jersey bard who just happens to be the grandfather of American poetry, Walt Whitman. He’s a superstar who grew out of the same zeitgeist that spawned them and their ambitions. And though we know he’s got the brainpower of any Mensa member and the energy of the CERN Collider, he’s everyman and that’s what matters.

To read the rest, and take a poll about your favorite Springsteen trivia, click here.

Shawn Amos: A Jam Band Haters List of Jam Bands to Love

Phish is back with a vengeance. Now that Trey is off the junk, the band has been busier – and more focused – than ever. Since reuniting this year (they broke up in 2004) the jam band has released a new album ("Joy" produced by longtime U2 collaborator Steve Lillywhite), headlined this year’s Bonnaroo Festival, and made their first Rock Band appearance.

And next weekend, the Phish takes over the Coachella grounds for Festival 8 – three days of Phish-ness kicking off on Halloween and including their first-ever full acoustic set (Sunday morning with coffee and donuts being served).

I’ll admit that I have a difficult relationship with jam bands. Improvisational music is a dangerous proposition. For every 3-minutes of musical bliss, there are another 20 of mind-numbing noodling. I went to a Grateful Dead show. Once. After the spinners, the naked dude asking me, "do you know where I am," the 10,000 tie-dyed, patchouli-smelling stoners looking for their miracle, and the interminable "space" drum solo, I had enough and never looked back. Give me a tight, three minute, 20-second pop song – and a shower – any day.

Who’s the best jam band of all time? [SodaHead Poll]

Still, I’m man enough to admit it when I see a guitar player who can bend the mind. And most jam bands have some insanely godlike guitarists. Even if the solo goes on too long. Plus, I’m a sucker for the southern twang most jam bands employ. I probably flew a confederate flag in another life. Coming back as a black man is my penance (although it has its perks).

Here’s a jam band haters list of jam bands to love. Wait for the solo. Tapers take note.

Cream

The first supergroup (at the least the first that mattered), Cream was comprised of former Yardbirds guitarist Eric Clapton and Graham Bond Quartet drummer and bassist Ginger Baker and Jack Bruce. The ride lasted only a brief two years (with a 1993 and 2005 reuniting) but the jams were sweet and bluesy.

The Jery Garcia Band

Despite the legendary inconsistencies (by his own admission, he turned in the worst performance at Woodstock), Jerry Garcia could be surprisingly melodic and majestic. The late Garcia’s playing was some of the most romantic around…when the drugs were working just right. Garcia’s side project, The Jerry Garcia Band was hands down the superior alternative to the Dead. In fact, they played Dead songs better than the Dead. All the jam, less the out-of-tune harmonies.

Allman Brothers Band

For me, the Allman Brothers Band died along with slide guitarist Duane Allman’s 1971 fatal motorcycle accident. Their "At Fillmore East" album (released shortly before Duane’s death) is the gold standard of live albums – by jam bands or otherwise. Not a wasted note and not a false move.

Widespread Panic

The Athens, Georgia jam band lost their lead guitarist and co-founder, Michael Houser, to pancreatic cancer in 2002. The band’s name was inspired by his frequent panic attacks before shows. Houser’s solos (which involved excessive use of a volume pedal) were high art and while two subsequent guitarists – George McConnell (2002-2006) and Jimmy Herring (2006 – current) have real gifts Houser’s loss is still real.

String Cheese Incident

The Boulder, Colorado band has a place in my heart because of their love of bluegrass (although the Dead’s Jerry Garcia had the same love which turned up in their tunes). SCI’s love of twang and groove stays close to the roots. Founding member Bill Nershi left the band in 2007 which has left SCI a part time operation since.

Paul Brown: …and then he got fired

Two Christian religious leaders combined yesterday to warn that time was running out for the life of the planet.

Pope Benedict XVI was supporting the “green” Patriarch Bartholomew 1, leader of 300 million of the world’s orthodox Christians at the opening of eighth Religion, Science and Environment Symposium, in New Orleans. The symposium is concentrating on the fate of the Mississippi and its delta.

The Patriarch was most direct “We have expanded our dominion over nature to the point where absolute limits to our survival are being reached.”

“We are consuming environmental capital and destroying its sources as if there is no tomorrow”

The Pope delivered his message via the Archbishop of New Orleans Gregory Aymond. He said “Concern for the fate of the great rivers of our earth must lead us to reflect soberly on the model of development which our society is pursuing.”

The solution to the ecological crisis of our time necessarily calls for a change of heart on the part of our contemporaries.

The idea of gathering scientists, theologians and ecologists together in a symposium ahead of the climate talks in Copenhagen in three weeks is to urge politicians to act before it is too late.

Both leaders think the Mississippi and its delta with its crippling environmental issues are a clear example of the problems facing the planet. The world’s richest nation, with its development of the gulf of Mexico for oil and gas exploitation and navigation channels for shipping, is at the same time destroying the delta that protects the coast and the city of New Orleans from sinking and being overwhelmed by the sea.

So while it would seem superficially that everyone is on the same side, that is saving the delta and its environment, there are some powerful conflicting interests.

Journalists from Europe got a taste of this when they were shown around the city by Professor Ivor van Heerden. He is an expert on hurricanes and spent 18 years at Louisiana State University. He warned of the vulnerability of New Orleans to hurricanes before Katrina struck. He was appointed head of the state investigation into the disaster afterwards and pointed to the many failures in the levee system and the construction of canals for navigation as the principle causes. In other words it was a man-made not a natural disaster.

He also took part in a court case aimed at getting compensation for the victims, who without help will never be able to return to the city and rebuild their homes. A decision on the causes of the disaster and compensation for the victims is imminent.

Professor Heerden, shrugs his shoulders when asked why, having first being proved right about the coming disaster and then correctly analysing the causes, the university terminated his contract.

I guess there are some big players out there who do not like uncomfortable truths and the university felt unable to support me.

The struggle to give New Orleans a viable future clearly still has a long way to run.

Paul Brown: …and then he got fired

Two Christian religious leaders combined yesterday to warn that time was running out for the life of the planet.

Pope Benedict XVI was supporting the “green” Patriarch Bartholomew 1, leader of 300 million of the world’s orthodox Christians at the opening of eighth Religion, Science and Environment Symposium, in New Orleans. The symposium is concentrating on the fate of the Mississippi and its delta.

The Patriarch was most direct “We have expanded our dominion over nature to the point where absolute limits to our survival are being reached.”

“We are consuming environmental capital and destroying its sources as if there is no tomorrow”

The Pope delivered his message via the Archbishop of New Orleans Gregory Aymond. He said “Concern for the fate of the great rivers of our earth must lead us to reflect soberly on the model of development which our society is pursuing.”

The solution to the ecological crisis of our time necessarily calls for a change of heart on the part of our contemporaries.

The idea of gathering scientists, theologians and ecologists together in a symposium ahead of the climate talks in Copenhagen in three weeks is to urge politicians to act before it is too late.

Both leaders think the Mississippi and its delta with its crippling environmental issues are a clear example of the problems facing the planet. The world’s richest nation, with its development of the gulf of Mexico for oil and gas exploitation and navigation channels for shipping, is at the same time destroying the delta that protects the coast and the city of New Orleans from sinking and being overwhelmed by the sea.

So while it would seem superficially that everyone is on the same side, that is saving the delta and its environment, there are some powerful conflicting interests.

Journalists from Europe got a taste of this when they were shown around the city by Professor Ivor van Heerden. He is an expert on hurricanes and spent 18 years at Louisiana State University. He warned of the vulnerability of New Orleans to hurricanes before Katrina struck. He was appointed head of the state investigation into the disaster afterwards and pointed to the many failures in the levee system and the construction of canals for navigation as the principle causes. In other words it was a man-made not a natural disaster.

He also took part in a court case aimed at getting compensation for the victims, who without help will never be able to return to the city and rebuild their homes. A decision on the causes of the disaster and compensation for the victims is imminent.

Professor Heerden, shrugs his shoulders when asked why, having first being proved right about the coming disaster and then correctly analysing the causes, the university terminated his contract.

I guess there are some big players out there who do not like uncomfortable truths and the university felt unable to support me.

The struggle to give New Orleans a viable future clearly still has a long way to run.

More on Climate Change

Rebecca Gerendasy: No Impact Week: Tips on How Not to Waste Food (Video)

Jonathan Bloom, journalist, and author of Wasted Food Blog, lists out the practical steps for reducing individual food waste in the home. The ultimate goal is to insure that the least amount of food gets thrown in the trash, and deposited in land fills. Do you have additional methods for reducing food waste that work for you? Any stories about food that you have seen wasted? For those who may be interested, the fruit gleaning project mentioned in the show can be seen in its entirety here: Urban Fruit Gleaning.