Melbourne and Monash university academics help Journal of Medical Ethics create the perfect storm

Ethics debates often go where angels fear to tread in order to define the range of moral dilemmas and this appears to be one sensitive example.

Abstract

Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.

Full article After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? at the Journal of Medical Ethics (JME)  on February 23, 2012.

Responses to this JME article published online:

My opinion on controversial paper published about infanticide

Manuel Menes

J Med Ethics published online March 28, 2012

[Full text]

Response to After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

Philip Dawson

J Med Ethics published online March 27, 2012

[Full text]

Singering from the same hymn sheet... [CORRECTED VERSION]

Matthew J Wilson

J Med Ethics published online March 27, 2012

[Full text]

Six propositions on end-of-life decisions in neonatology

Sofia Moratti

J Med Ethics published online March 26, 2012

[Full text]

After- birth abortion and infanticide: the controversy lingers on

Robert Kar Ngai Yuen

J Med Ethics published online March 26, 2012

[Full text]

Re:After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? An Answer

Elvira Parravicini,

Federica Fromm, Giuseppe Paterlini, Patrizia Vergani

J Med Ethics published online March 19, 2012

[Full text]

A human being's right to live is a moral axiom

Agata Mizerska

J Med Ethics published online March 16, 2012

[Full text]

Re:Awkward Truths Should Make People Re-evaluate Routine Practice

Coral D Carmichael

J Med Ethics published online March 16, 2012

[Full text]

After-birth abortion: why should the baby live? An Answer

Dina Nerozzi

J Med Ethics published online March 16, 2012

[Full text]

Re:A response to 'After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

Maria Gabriella Gatti

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Consistency Required

Cadi S Palmer

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Slippery Slope Slipped Upon

Mel Beckman

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Accepting Infanticide

Ellen Simoni

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Defining a person is morally crucial

Andrew R Cress

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

After birth abortion

Fiona E Beavan

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Where there is no love...

Josephine M Treloar

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Newborns, really?

Christina C

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

The fetus and the newborn, what is the difference.

Sheena L Queen

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

What about the dad?

Nancy M Heitschmidt

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Re:Awkward Truths Should Make People Re-evaluate Routine Practice

Grzegorz Nowakowski

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Definition of terms

Randall L. Norstrem

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Can Moral Value Be Quantified?

J. O. Lay

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Adoption as a solution

Melanie M. Rudquist

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Competing interests and infanticide

Dirk C. Baltzly

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Re:Awkward Truths Should Make People Re-evaluate Routine Practice

maureen mckane

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Infanticide and termination - an inexorable progression of logic

charles soper

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

A Modest Proposal

Bruce M Anderson

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Can after-birth abortion do harm?

Joshua P. Cohen

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Re:A response to 'After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

Ronald E. Ledek

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Re:A response to 'After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

Tom Koch

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

A Modest Proposal

Alan W.H. Bates

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

Re:A response to 'After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

Tracey M Upchurch

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

The fallacious argument of 'After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?'

Martin Rhonheimer

J Med Ethics published online March 14, 2012

[Full text]

A response to 'After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

David J Pohlmann

J Med Ethics published online March 5, 2012

[Full text]

Awkward Truths Should Make People Re-evaluate Routine Practice

Tim M Reynolds

J Med Ethics published online March 2, 2012

[Full text]

NSW Upper House Whip gets caught out telling political whoppers on Twitter

Apparently NSW LC Government Whip Dr. Peter Phelps likes to tweet from the floor of the Legislative Council and keeps his Blackberry fairly smoking.

Here he is on 2^nd April 2012:

Peter Phelps‏ @PeterPhelpsMLC

Just slammed Greens in NSW for crying crocodile tears for TWU, when their policy calls for major attacks on road transport industry #nswpol

Peter Phelps @PeterPhelpsMLC

Another Labor MP quotes verbatim Wikipedia for their contribution to LC debate, this time on 99 year leases #ffs #nswpol #thatsnotresearch

Intrigued, I opened Hansard up and took a good look at the CENTENNIAL PARK AND MOORE PARK TRUST AMENDMENT BILL 2012 second reading debate which began about 9.02pm. After sorting his interjection chaff from the record and discovering the rather meagre Phelps contribution to the business of the day, I began to think there was something rather odd about his "Wikipedia" tweet.

Yep, you guessed it – no "verbatim" quoting of Teh Wiki by a Labor MP.

So, not only is Phelps an arrogant self-proclaimed troll on Twitter – he tells whoppers as well.

Correction: Gulaptis DID speak in the debate, but ...

This corrrespondent has a confession to make. Just after 5.20pm yesterday the phone rang at my place and my attention was diverted away from the parliamentary webcast of proceedings in the NSW Legislative Chamber where the Road Transport Legislation Amendment (Offender Nomination) Bill was up for debate.

Consequently, the contributions made to the debate by two north coast National Party MPs, Geoff Provest (Tweed) and Chris Gulaptis (Clarence), were broadcast to an empty room at my place.

Hansard shows Provest spoke at 5.24pm followed by Gulaptis at 5.34pm and then Tony Issa (Liberal MP for Granville) at 5.42pm.

What was interesting about the contributions Provest and Gulaptis made to the debate wasn't their support for the bill (that was a given) but a couple of other things.

Provest:
I mentioned that Sextons Hill is a number one black spot. Yesterday the new southbound lanes were opened. There has been argument about this issue but I will set the record straight. That project is about to be finished, at a total cost of $359 million. The Federal Government contributed $349 million and the New South Wales Government contributed $10 million. That verifies previous arrangements.

Gulaptis:
If companies do the right thing and nominate the offending driver, they will avoid facing additional penalties. These legislative measures are directed at companies that do not do the right thing, and we know who they are.

While Provest came clean in relation to funding for the Sextons Hill project, Gulaptis left a void that could easily have been filled. Why didn't the Member for Clarence name and shame the companies he knows that are not doing the right thing?

Will Clarence MP speak up?

Yesterday in the NSW Legislative Assembly the Road Transport Legislation Amendment (Offender Nomination) Bill had another airing. The Bill is designed primarily to get companies to reveal the identity of persons driving their vehicles when they are guilty of road camera offences.

Proceedings in the chamber made for interesting viewing via the parliamentary webcast.

However, this viewer was disappointed one local MP, Chris Gulaptis, Member for Clarence didn't push himself forward and remind the house that his very presence in that place was due to a parallel act of skulduggery committed by his predecessor, the disgraced former Member for Clarence, Steve Cansdell.

Government members queued to speak and support the bill, but Mark Coure, the Liberal Member for Oatley, said it all by remarking that companies had to stop implementing the deliberate ploy of shielding their offending drivers by not nominating them and having them take responsibility for the offences.

Perhaps, if he had the chance to do it all over again, Cansdell could have obtained an ABN and used a company car whenever he risked going within lens reach of those !@#! road cameras.

Coal Seam Gas in Australia: Is the CSIRO helping the mining industry 'manage' the debate?

If it the issue wasn’t so serious for the NSW North Coast it would have been amusing to see this in The Daily Examiner state on 28 March 2012:

We asked the Australian Science Media Centre if it could provide us with information not coloured by vested interests and it provided us with a briefing by Gas Industry Social and Environmental Research Alliance director Dr Peter Stone, University of Newcastle coal geologist and sedimentary petrologist Dr Judy Bailey and CSIRO petroleum and geothermal portfolio director Dr Edson Nakagawa.

Not coloured by vested interests is a big claim to make considering that the CSIRO is no longer the dependable, disinterested source it used to be given the number of commercial relationships it has developed over the years.

The CSIRO itself is very open about its wealth creation aims:

So let us start with the Gas Industry Social and Environmental Research Alliance.

This is ABC Rural on 13 July 2011:

A commonwealth scientific body and a coal seam gas company have today announced a $14 million dollar joint research venture.

The Gas Industry Social and Environmental Research Alliance or GISERA is between the CSIRO and Australia Pacific LNG.

CSIRO's deputy chief of Ecosystem Sciences Dr Peter Stone says it'll draw scientific contributions from all across the country.

He says he hopes more of the industry's companies will come on board.

Australia Pacific LNG is a coal seam gas producer and GISERA appears to act as a R&D agent for the oil and gas industry, which may eventually lead to a widespread public perception that it is riddled with conflicts of interest.

Where does Dr Peter Stone fit into this scenario?

Dr. Stone has a background in crop and food research and an interest in land management. One has to hope that he has no vested interest in relation to mining. However, at best he appears ambivilant.

This article High risk demands stronger regulation of mining projects in The Australian on 26 November 2011 does not reassure as it begins:

WHEN CSIRO scientist Peter Stone briefed federal MPs and staff on coal-seam gas earlier this month, those in the room with some understanding of the likely effects were taken aback by his low-risk characterisation of the mammoth CSG projects that involved 40,000 production wells in southeast Queensland.

What about Dr Judy Bailey?

Well, her University of Newcastle profile shows minimum involvement with mining companies – except for the Orica Australia "Mineral sequestration in the Great Serpentine Belt, NSW" 2008 $6,500 funding grant – so it is easier to see her as an independent voice.

As for Dr Edson Nakagawa?

Dr. Edson is apparently a member of the Society of Petroleum Engineers and prior to joining the CSIRO apparently spent twenty years working for Petrobas in Brazil, starting in 1980. Petrobas has shown an interest in Australia and, also appears to use CSIRO technology in its operations overseas.

His current role is focussed on the development and deployment of tools, technology and knowledge to advanced petroleum exploration, conventional and unconventional gas production, alternative transport fuels and the demonstration of geothermal energy in Australia according to the introduction to December 2011 Australian Science Media Centre briefing.
A profile which does not inspire confidence in his objectivity.

The Daily Examiner attempted a balanced article. It was unfortunate that it wasn't alert to problems with its less than discriminating referral source, the Australian Science Media Centre. At least the newspaper ended the article with links (originally inert):

For a full transcript of the briefing, go to aussmc.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/coal-seam-gas-briefing-1-transcript.pdf or to hear the presentation, go to aussmc.org/2011/12/background-briefing-getting-your-head-around-coal-seam-gas.

So you can judge the views of these individuals for yourselves and, whether you think they are likely to say one thing to regional journalists and another to government decision makers.
Whether any GISERA formal report will have a predestined pro-mining conclusion irrespective of what the science is actually saying.

Oopps! Another banana skin for the unwary Australian politician

All around the world pollies past and present are looking investor embarrassment in the face, including U.S. presidential hopeful Mitt Romney who has  mountain of moolah earning interest over at Goldman Sachs in its many manifestations.

But none more so than Malcolm Bligh Turnbull, Australia’s Federal Opposition Shadow Minister for Communications and Broadband.

He of course was Chairman and Managing Director of Goldman Sachs Australia from 1997 to 2001 and a Partner in Goldman Sachs and Co from 1998 to 2001. In 2012 he still has money invested with Goldman Sachs private equity funds, probably including GS Capital Partners V1.

Which means he was well and truly in the frame when Goldman Sachs (through its private equity fund GS Capital Partners III) purchased a 16% share in Backpage.com in 2000.

Village Voice Media Holdings now owns Backpage and Goldman Sachs is selling its share because this website has just been outed as a forum abetting the sex-trafficking of underage girls.

Goldman Sachs has all but admitted that it knew in 2010 what the website was being used for – long before the New York Times report on 31^st March this year.

This letter lists a number of U.S. sex trafficking and child prostitution court cases in which Backpage features and mention of cases involving adults or children going back to 2009-10 can be found on the Internet – including this video.

Chris Gulaptis votes against IR fairness

It has long been known in the Clarence electorate that its new NSW Nationals MP ‘Steve’ Gulaptis was an ardent supporter of Work Choices.

In fact, when he was a Clarence Valley Shire councillor he wanted to introduce some of its worst features into local government conditions of employment. As a member of the O’Farrell Government he maintains his desire to make life difficult for ordinary workers.

On 2 April 2012 he voted for the Retail Trading Amendment Bill 2012 which in practice will allow a wider numbers of employers in New South Wales to pressure full-time, part-time and/or casual staff to work on a restricted trading day, Boxing Day, and in certain circumstances possibly have to work on Christmas Day when the business is not open to customers.

Brickbats to this out of touch MP who once declared "Northern Rivers residents moved to the region accepting they would be paid lower wages as part of the trade-off for living in one of the most desirable parts of Australia".

Abbott the Boastful forgets his own Medicare safety net history

The Daily Telegraph reported on 1 April 2012 that: Senior Gillard government ministers have confirmed that while "no final decisions have been made" the government is considering a nip and tuck to the generous Medicare safety net that has faced multi-million-dollar cost blowouts.

Also on 1 April Opposition leader Tony Abbott told 9 News:  "The Medicate safety net was put in place by me. I have the copyright on the Medicare safety net. It is very, very good policy and it should not be further damaged by this government."

This is a typically inaccurate statement by Abbott. There was a safety net written into the Australian Medicare universal health care scheme before he became Federal Minister for Health and Ageing in the Howard Coalition Government. A position he held from 7 October 2003 until 3 December 2007.

In 2003 the existing safety net thresholds were $306.90 for concession card holders and other low income families, and $716.10 for all other families and individuals, indexed annually.

In November 2003 the Extended Medicare Safety Net was proposed. It came into effect in March 2004 and, provided for safety net thresholds of $300 for concession card holders and low income families and $700 for all other individuals and families. In other words, after thresholds had been reached Medicare paid for 80% of any future out-of-pocket costs for out-of-hospital Medicare services for the remainder of the calendar year.

In the lead up to the October 2004 federal election Health Minister Abbott was interviewed by ABC TV Four Corners on 6 September and gave a guarantee that the safety net threshold would not be changed:

TICKY FULLERTON: Will this Government commit to keeping the Medicare-plus-safety-net as it is now in place after the election?
TONY ABBOTT: Yes.
TICKY FULLERTON: That's a cast-iron commitment?
TONY ABBOTT: Cast-iron commitment. Absolutely.
TICKY FULLERTON, REPORTER: 80 per cent of out-of-pocket expenses rebatable over $300, over $700?
TONY ABBOTT: That is an absolutely rock solid, ironclad commitment.

However, just six months later in April 2005 the Howard Government was announcing that Medicare Safety Net threshold levels would increase from $306.90 to $500 for concession card holders and other low income families, and from $716.10 to $1000 for all other families and individuals from 1 January 2006.

In that same month the Howard Government provided figures showing a further increase in projected Safety Net expenditure and the Prime Minister told ABC radio that if the current threshold levels were maintained, the cost of the Safety Net would be $1.65 billion over the next four years (to 30 June 2009)—almost four times the original projections.

By 1 January 2007 Tony Abbott had again raised the safety net thresholds to $358.90 (from $345.50) for the Original Safety Net category and $519.50 (from $500.00) for the lower Extended Safety Net category and $1,039.00 (from $1,000.00) for the upper category.

All of which can hardly be characterized as Howard or Abbott being fiscally responsible in relation to health care policy and doesn’t support Abbott’s present boastful tone.

For the record. Under the Gillard Labor Government Medicare benefits for out-of-hospital services are usually 80-85 per cent of the schedule fee, except for GP consultations where the Medicare rebate is 100 per cent of the schedule fee.

In 2012 the Original Safety Net threshold for all Medicare card holders is $413.50 and the Extended Medicare Safety Net threshold for concession cardholders and people who receive Family Tax Benefits (Part A) is $562.90. For all other singles and families the annual threshold is $1,198.

Two good reasons why you should stop buying chocolate, icecream, frozen desserts, biscuits, crisps or soap and shampoo products made with palm oil

According to Barbi this Orangutan mother was captured stealing fruit for her undernourished infant.
You can feel proud the next time you put a chocolate bar, ice cream cone, slice of cheescake, sweet biscuit or handful of crisps in your mouth, shower with a soap bar or shampoo your hair from the usual range of toiletry products.

Abbott & Co.'s sovereign risk claims don't stand up to scrutiny

“Since 1999, the Behre Dolbear Group Inc. has compiled annual political risk assessments of the key

players in the global mining industry.”

In 2010 the Gillard Government announced it was introducing a national price on carbon, the 18 clean energy bills were passed by federal parliament in 2011. The start date for the provisions of most of this new legislation is mid-2012.

This is Australia’s global mining industry risk assessment ranking as one of the international Behre Dolbear Group’s “key players”:

2010 ranked at 61

2011 ranked at 57

2012 ranked at 57

Err, Tones, Uncle Joe, Poodle – what happened to the “sovereign risk” for mining companies you were all shouting about?

Australia’s risk level has gone down and not up since the PM announced the “toxic tax” you’ve been wailing about.

It takes very little effort to correctly fill in the Parliamentary Register of Member's Interests. So why does Tony Abbott continually mess up his form?

Here is the link to the current and updated Register of Member's Interests for Abbott, The Hon Tony, Member for Warringah.

In it he lists his spouse as holding an unspecified number of shares in General Gold Resources Inc. In 2007 he listed these shares as General Gold Resources NL.

However, this WA mining corporation changed its name in July 2002 to General Gold Resources Limited and a month later to Yilgarn Gold Limited. At some later date it again changed its name to Kairiki Energy Limited. The company is currently listed on the Australian Stock Exchange as a petroleum exploration, gold mining, exploration and investment company operating in the Phillipines.

As all shareholders would have been informed of these name changes, one has to wonder why Abbott has not changed the details recorded on his RMI form for at least the last four years.

Given his history in relation to the Register of Member's Interests this current inaccuracy isn't good enough.

Though at least we know that he is still turning up to some doorstop interviews in tailored suits he hasn't paid for.

Wanted: A local hero willing to lay down their life for their council

A North Coast Voices reader contacted me the other day to draw my attention to the fact that Clarence Valley Council was not optimistic about attracting government funding for a roundabout at the intersection of Yamba Road and Treelands Drive, because local residents have been so inconsiderate as to not get themselves killed or injured in high enough numbers to satisfy the NSW Roads and Maritime Service.

Apparently the highest priorities would come from those with 3 casualties or more in the previous 5 years and, so far Yamba has only been able to produce two at that particular intersection and in that time frame.

The local wag suggested that Yamba trawl its 7,000 plus population for someone willing to lay down their life to make up the numbers, so that the roundabout could occur in his lifetime and a reluctant Grafton-centric Council didn’t have to put its hand in its pocket for the full $400,000.

Cartoon from Google Images

The Clarence River Historical Society’s January 2012 Newsletter reproduced a piece that appeared in The Clarence and Richmond Examiner on 26 November 1887. The CRE didn't claim it as a scoop - just as well, because it's suggested in some quarters that Gutenberg cast an eye over it but elected not to print it. However, the message it contains is as relevant today as when it first appeared.

 



Another Cansdell admission finally goes public?

The allegation of misusing parliamentary allowances has been quietly circulating in the NSW Clarence electorate since last year, initially making it into newspapers in relation to one instance of allowing a staffer to work on a federal election campaign in the seat of Page and initially denied by Cansdell.

However, this is the first time I have seen it in print couched as an admission of wrongdoing.

Barry to build himself a big legacy in News.com.au 25 March 2012:

Nationals MP Steve Cansdell was forced to resign from parliament after admitting to falsifying a statutory declaration and misusing parliamentary allowances.

Did Cansdell make undisclosed admissions to Stoner in September 2011 and, what else is the electorate not being told by Premier O’Farrell and NSW Nationals Leader Andrew Stoner concerning these allegations?

The question of contaminants in recycled plastic

Before reusing materials, recycling companies sort and shred plastic housings,

metal wires, and computer keyboards.

Recyclers continue to struggle with contaminants in electronic waste and in consumer plastics according to Naomi Lubik in the Environmental Science & Technology journal in Plastic’s Polluted Burden: ES&T’s Top Policy Analysis Article 2011.

In Europe researchers found that every class of plastics was contaminated. Overall, the team measured levels of cadmium close to or slightly above the levels set by the directive, but mercury well below the target levels. Lead in some places was very high, occurring at up to 7800 ppm…..

Recycling programs in Europe take in items including refrigerators, computers, cell phones, toys, and medical devices.

The wide variety of incoming plastics, as seen in the photo above, can be difficult to sort. In some of the more advanced recycling plants, mechanical shredding gets the plastics down to fingernail-size pieces, which must then be sorted by weight or optical methods to pinpoint the plastic type…..

Recycling contaminated plastics means that hazardous substances will never completely disappear from the market.

“We spread contaminants into a variety of products,” says Martin Schlummer of Fraunhofer Institute for Process Engineering and Packaging in Freising, Germany. Schlummer works on methods to separate plastics and extract flame retardants. To get rid of contaminants, he says, “you should sort such plastics from e-waste and treat them separately.”  

According to ABS Australia’s Environment Issues and Trends 2010:

Australians are among the highest users of new technology in the world. Waste from obsolete electronic goods, or “e-waste”, is one of the fastest growing waste types.

In practical terms e-waste includes items such as televisions, DVD & video players, stereos, power tools, desktop computers and laptops, computer keyboards, scanners, printers, fax machines, mobile phones and PDAs, kitchen appliances, and ink & toner cartridges – from which plastic is often extracted for recycling.

Such e-waste can have components containing lead, antimony, mercury, phosphors, beryllium, brominated flame retardants (BFRs), phthalates, cadmium or arsenic.

Although many recycling facilities operating in Australia routinely separate e-waste from other sorts of waste**, one has to wonder if there is any ability to ensure that no contaminants have been absorbed into the plastic being extracted. Given that items containing plastic only appear to be manually sorted for visible gross contaminants, before being mechanically processed and separated into plastic/non-plastic material which had been reduced to tiny segments along the processing chain.

The entire question is complicated by the fact that Information about the disposal and recycling of waste materials and products is variable in scope and quality with some jurisdictions not collecting data and others having different waste categories according to the National Waste Report 2010.

** Veolia Environmental Services Australia states:

The recycling of the E-Waste equipment is performed at Sims E-Recycling, a joint venture set up between Veolia and the Sims Group. Electronic waste collected undergoes a manual dismantling process. The individual materials such as printed circuit boards, cabling, glass and plastics etc., are recovered and then processed so that they can be used as raw materials to produce new products.

Sims Recycling Solutions states that it:

dismantles a wide range of electrical and electronic products, ensuring all sensitive data is shredded to protect customer assets. Hazardous substances are recovered and disposed of in an environmentally friendly manner. Commodities such as metals, plastics and glass are then processed for recycling.
Recycling company 1800 E Waste states: Most electronic waste goes through a recycling system called a WEEE (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment), which not only recycles 95-98%, by weight, of all ewaste passed through it, but ensures that any data left on hard drives and memories are thoroughly destroyed too. 
■Picking Shed – first all the items are sorted by hand and batteries and copper are extracted for quality control.
■Initial Size Reduction Process – items are shredded into pieces as small as 100mm to prepare the ewaste to be thoroughly sorted. This is also where the data destruction takes place.
■Secondary Size Reduction – the small debris is shaken to ensure that it is evenly spread out on the conveyor belt, before it gets broken down even more. Any dust extracted is disposed of in an environmentally friendly way.
 ■Overband Magnet – using magnets, steel and iron are removed from the debris.
■Metallic & Non-Metallic Content – aluminium, copper and brass are separated from the non-metallic content. The metallic can then be reused and resold as raw materials.
■Water Separation – water is used to separate plastic from the glass content. Once divided all raw materials can then be resold.

The Hon. Dr. Peter Phelps MLC - portrait of a political ar$ehole

Three pictures speak volumes about this ignorant pollie.













Snapshots from
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/
and
@PeterPhelpsMLC

Update

Finally found that Phelps swearing tweet:

Scoop: Local MP plans to appear in avatar format

At yesterday arvo's meeting of The Table of Knowledge at the local watering hole Tom, who claims to know everything and anything about politics, had his wife's sister's young fella (truly, that's how Tom refers to the strapping young man, not simply his nephew) along as a guest.

When the agenda moved to consider the absence of our local charmer, oops that should be member, Chris Gulaptis's smiling dial on the parliament's website the young visitor remarked, "Reckon he's probably put it out for tender."

"What do you mean?" enquired Tom.

"Oh, sorry, Uncle Tom, but I thought from the way you and Aunty spoke about your local MP at home you reckon he's the ants' pants, a sorta 2012 SNAG (sensitive new age guy) type of bloke.

"And, that being the case, he wouldn't want something as ordinary as a mug shot on the website. Nah, he's probably waiting quietly till his designer has finished his avatar."

Well, readers, remember you read that scoop here.

Hmmm, we're wondering what Chris's designer will come up with. Any suggestions?

New Carbon Farming Handbook Launched In Casino by Saffin and Dreyfus

THE HON MARK DREYFUS QC MP

Cabinet Secretary

Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency

Parliamentary Secretary for Industry and Innovation

THE HON JANELLE SAFFIN MP

Federal Member for Page

MEDIA RELEASE

New Carbon farming Handbook to help australia’s farmers create extra revenue

29 March, 2011

Farmers, landholders, waste operators and other clean energy businesses in the Northern Rivers region seeking to take part in the Gillard Government’s Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI) can now access information in a new handbook launched in Casino today by the Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Mark Dreyfus.

Speaking at a carbon farming forum organised by Federal Member for Page Janelle Saffin, Mr Dreyfus encouraged farmers, land owners, local government and other stakeholders to utilise the Carbon Farming Initiative to generate extra income by reducing agricultural and landfill waste pollution.

“Climate change poses a serious risk to the future of Australian agriculture and food production, with scientists confirming a strong link to less predictable and more intense weather events. Over the next six years, the Gillard Government will support the land sector by investing $1.7 billion dollars of carbon price revenue to support the CFI and other programs to improve productivity, sustainability and profitability,” said Mr Dreyfus.

“Farmers and landholders have an important role to play in our nation’s clean energy future by increasing the land sector's resilience to climate change and improving long term farm productivity.”

“The Carbon Farming Initiative Handbook will be a great resource for farmers in the Northern Rivers region. It sets out how farmers and landholders can improve their land and farm sustainability while generating carbon credits that can be sold on domestic and international markets,” said Ms Saffin.

“Farmers and landholders in the Northern Rivers region can now benefit from methodologies that have already been approved under the CFI, including reducing methane in piggeries, flaring landfill gas, planting native species and reducing pollution from savanna burning,” said Ms Saffin.

“CSIRO, universities and other research bodies are developing a number of other methodologies with the federal government, including dairy cattle food supplementation, enhanced efficiency fertilisers, manure management and soil carbon,” said Mr Dreyfus.

While in the region, the Parliamentary Secretary also visited Casino West Public School, which received funding under the National Solar Schools Program, and met with local councils to discuss the CFI and the Government’s Clean Energy Future plan.

Further information about the Carbon Farming Initiative is available at: www.climatechange.gov.au/cfi

Media contact: Giulia Baggio 0400 918 776 (Dreyfus) and  Matt Dunne 0417 287 456 (Saffin)

Planet Under Pressure 2012 Conference: Recommendations for Navigating the Anthropocene

The Planet Under Pressure Conference 2012 at its March 24-29 London gathering released this:

Science for Policy:

Recommendations for Navigating the Anthropocene

Nine Policy Briefs to help inform policy agenda in next decade

International science community has published a series of Policy Briefs for the United Nations Rio+20 conference in June 2012.

“Rio+20 is an opportunity for progress. We commissioned these nine briefs to summarise scientific findings relevant to the Rio+20 agenda: the green economy and sustainable development.” says Nobel Laureate Professor Elinor Ostrom, the conference chief scientific advisor. “They cover a variety of topics, but a key feature of all briefs is the need for an interconnected approach to addressing our global challenges.”

The final four briefs for the series, released at the London Planet Under Pressure conference today, focus on energy security, green economy, health and wellbeing. Five Policy Briefs, published in late 2011, deal with interconnected risks and solutions, international governance for sustainable development, water security, food security and biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Key findings overleaf here

All nine Policy Briefs will be officially presented by a high-level scientific panel moderated by Georgios Kostakos, Deputy Director of the UN Secretary General’s Global Sustainability Panel, at the Planet Under Pressure conference, Monday, March 26, 2012, 1.00-1.40pm British Summer Time, Plenary Hall.

A parallel suite of scientific white papers is published in a special issue of the Journal Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability Volume 4, Issue 1 – selected pp. 1-158 (February 2012).

Note to Editors

The research discussed in the press release, the conclusions drawn and the opinions offered are those of individual speakers or research teams at the Planet Under Pressure conference.

*The Anthropocene

The Anthropocene as a new geological epoch was first proposed in 2000 by Dutch Nobel Laureate Professor Paul Crutzen and US academic Professor Eugene Stoermer (1934-2012). Crutzen, Stoermer and others argued that the vast human enterprise now rivals the great geological forces of nature.

More information about Planet under Pressure Conference

The international science conference will be the biggest gathering of global environmental change specialists in advance of the United Nations Rio+20 Summit: 2,500 scientists, policymakers, industry and media representatives will meet to hear the latest research findings on the state of the planet and discuss concepts for planetary stewardship and societal and economic transformation towards global sustainability.

More information on the web: http://www.planetunderpressure2012.net/