Entries from March 2010 ↓

From – www.alternative-energy-news.info

Scientists are quite optimistic that hydrogen will emerge as the fuel of the future and the world would be driven by ‘hydrogen economy’. The only byproduct of hydrogen fuel is water vapor. By using hydrogen fuel we can reduce the harmful effects of greenhouse gases. Currently many research labs are engaged in duplicating the phenomenon of photosynthesis to produce hydrogen fuel. What fascinates the scientists is the splitting of water into hydrogen and oxygen by using solar energy. A vast majority of scientists all over the world believe that we can get rid of our dependence on fossil fuels by breaking water into its components. Even some automobile companies such as Toyota are promoting hydrogen fueled cars. But till now the use of hydrogen as fuel is not cost effective. That is why we are still waiting for the ‘hydrogen economy’ to arrive.

Scientists are trying to develop a design that would be an artificial leaf but its function would be almost similar to natural leaf. Like a real leaf, the lab designed leaf too utilizes solar energy and water to produce hydrogen. In biology this process performed by green leaves is known as photosynthesis. Their methodology would take inspiration from chemistry and biology of natural leaves.

The above mentioned project is being carried out at State Key Lab of Matrix Composites at Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China. Tongxiang Fan, Ph.D. states, “This concept may provide a new vista for the design of artificial photosynthetic systems based on biological paradigms and build a working prototype to exploit sustainable energy resources.” His other team members are Di Zhang, Ph.D. and Han Zhou, also a Ph.D. They are preparing to attend the 239th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society (ACS) in San Francisco. It is one of the prestigious and largest scientific meet of 2010. In this meeting more than 12,000 scientific reports will be presented.

Fan and his co-workers decided to duplicate the natural design and development of a blueprint for artificial leaf like structures. They christened their creation as the “Artificial Inorganic Leaf” (AIL). They also used titanium dioxide (TiO2), as a photocatalyst for hydrogen production.

Researchers used the native plant of China, known as Anemone vitifolia for their experiments. They infiltrated the leaves of Anemone vitifolia with titanium dioxide in a two step process. They depended on advanced spectroscopic techniques to confirm the exact structural features in the leaf. These structural features helps in trapping the light energy of the sun. They replicated the same features in new TiO2 structure. It is found that the AIL are eight times more active for hydrogen production than TiO2. But it is true only when AIL has not been “biotemplated” in that fashion. Another plus point in favor of AILs is their activity is three times more in comparison with commercial photo-catalysts. The researchers also inserted the nanoparticles of platinum. It is a known fact that platinum along with the nitrogen increases the artificial leaves by an additional factor of ten.

Fan also articulated the fact that why his team’s artificial Inorganic Leaf production and its spectroscopic work are better than the existing ones. According to Fan the activity of AILs are significantly higher than those prepared with classic routes. Fan credits the better outcomes due to the hierarchical structures derived from natural leaves:

“Our results may represent an important first step towards the design of novel artificial solar energy transduction systems based on natural paradigms, particularly based on exploring and mimicking the structural design. Nature still has much to teach us, and human ingenuity can modify the principles of natural systems for enhanced utility.”

Saturday 27 March 2010

by: Bill Moyers and Michael Winship, t r u t h o u t | Op-Ed

That wickedly satirical Ambrose Bierce described politics as “the conduct of public affairs for private advantage.”

Bierce vanished to Mexico nearly a hundred years ago – to the relief of the American political class of his day, one assumes – but in an eerie way he was forecasting America’s political culture today. It seems like most efforts to reform a system that’s gone awry – to clean house and make a fresh start – end up benefiting the very people who wrecked it in the first place.

Which is why Bierce, in his classic little book, “The Devil’s Dictionary,” defined reform as “a thing that mostly satisfies reformers opposed to reformation.” So we got health care reform this week – but it’s a far cry from reformation. You can’t blame President Obama for celebrating what he did get – he and the Democrats needed some political points on the scoreboard. And imagine the mood in the White House if the vote had gone the other way; they would have been cutting wrists instead of cake.

Give the victors their due: the bill Obama signed expands coverage to many more people, stops some very ugly and immoral practices by the health insurance industry that should have been stopped long ago, and offers a framework for more change down the road, if there’s any heart or will left to fight for it.

But reformation? Hardly. For all their screaming and gnashing of teeth, the insurance companies still make out like bandits. Millions of new customers, under penalty of law, will be required to buy the companies’ policies, feeding the insatiable greed of their CEO’s and filling the campaign coffers of the politicians they wine and dine. Profits are secure; they don’t have to worry about competition from a public alternative to their cartel, and they can continue to scam us without fear of antitrust action.

The big drug companies bought their protection before the fight even began, when the White House agreed that if they supported Obama’s brand of health care reform – not reformation – they could hold onto their monopoly. No imports of cheaper drugs from abroad, no prescriptions filled at a lower price by our friendly Canadian neighbors to the north.

And let’s not forget another, gigantic health care winner: a new report from the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity says the battle for reform has been “a bonanza” for the lobbying industry. According to the center’s analysis, “About 1,750 businesses and organizations hired about 4,525 lobbyists, total – eight for each member of Congress – and spent at least $1.2 billion to influence health care bills and other issues.”

But while we’re at it, a cheer for the federal student-loan overhaul – Democrats managed to pass that reform with an end run around powerful lobbyists, cleverly nestling it in the health care reconciliation package.

Nonetheless, under pressure from the lending industry, it, too, was watered down from its original intent. The three Democratic senators who voted against it – Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor – have all received campaign contributions from Nelnet, the student loan company based in Nelson’s home state of Nebraska, or its lobbyists.

(And would you be amazed to learn that one of the student loan industry’s lobbyists used to be Blanche Lincoln’s chief of staff? The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call described Kelly Bingel as Lincoln’s “alter ego,” and cited a former colleague saying Bingel was “first on the list of the Senator’s callbacks,” words that would sound like heaven to any Washington lobbyist’s ears.)

Another case of reform gone off track: this week, a year and a half after Wall Street brought us so close to fiscal hell we could smell the brimstone, a crippled little financial regulation bill seems to be hobbling out of the wreckage, but still faces an array of well-armed forces gunning for it.

No wonder. In the 2008 and 2010 election cycles, members of the Senate Banking Committee – which sent the bill to Congress this week – received more than $39 million from Wall Street and the banks; members of the House Financial Services Committee raked in more than $21 million – so far. Just how serious do you think they’re going to be about true reform?

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd of Connecticut has sounded like a champion of reform ever since he announced he will not run for reelection. It’s about time. Since 2005, his top ten campaign contributors have included Citigroup, AIG, Merrill Lynch and the now-deceased Bear Stearns, all front-line players in bringing on the financial calamity.

Then there are the Republicans, shamelessly hawking their favors en masse to the highest bidder. The Web site Politico.com reports that the reelection campaign of Tennessee Sen. Bob Corker – who’s one of the key negotiators on financial reform – sent an email to Wall Street lobbyists and others soliciting contributions of up to $10,000 for a chance to meet or grab a meal with the senator.

Informed of the email, Corker was shocked – shocked! – saying the email was “grotesque and inappropriate.” But did House Republican leader John Boehner think it was inappropriate last week when he advised the American Bankers Association to fight back against the proposed rules and regulations?

This is, of course, the same John Boehner who in the summer of 1995 walked around the floor of the House of Representatives handing out checks to his fellow Republicans – checks from a tobacco company. And the same John Boehner who was the grateful recipient of campaign contributions from the four Native American tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, the corrupt lobbyist currently cooling his heels in a federal corrections facility.

So wouldn’t it have been fascinating to have been a fly on the wall earlier this year when Boehner sat down for drinks with Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase? Reportedly, he invited Dimon and the rest of the financial community to pony up the cash and see what good things follow.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Republicans already were receiving an increasing share of campaign contributions from the Street. In the game of reform, it’s the political version of loading the dice.

We can’t know for sure what Ambrose Bierce would have made of all this; what “The Devil’s Dictionary” author would say about the current DC scams. But he might have agreed that the only answer to organized money is organized people. That would be one hell of a reformation.

This work by Truthout is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

The one click group

By Ben Hirschler

* Saudi move first of its kind, after controversy over drug

* Six-month suspension gives Glaxo chance to put its case

LONDON, March 22 (Reuters) – Saudi Arabia has suspended GlaxoSmithKline’s (GSK.L) diabetes drug Avandia for six months, arguing that potential heart risks outweigh its benefits.

The Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA) was the first healthcare regulator to take such action. Its decision means detailing and advertising of Avandia is banned and patients on Avandia will be referred to their doctor for consultation. The SFDA said on its website it was concerned about the safety of Avandia, or rosiglitazone, based on growing evidence from clinical studies indicating serious cardiovascular risks. (link.reuters.com/zab74j)

The six-month suspension will give Glaxo “the opportunity to provide the SFDA with evidence as to why rosiglitazone and combination products containing rosiglitazone should not be permanently removed from the Saudi Arabian market,” it said.

The Saudi move follows a highly critical report on the drug from U.S. Senators last month, which suggested Glaxo knew of possible heart attack risks associated with Avandia years before the issue became public. [ID:nN20149014].

Glaxo has denied the Senators’ allegations.

A spokeswoman said on Monday the company would provide the SFDA with data from six clinical trials demonstrating the cardiovascular safety of Avandia. “We stand behind the safety and efficacy of Avandia when it is used appropriately.” (Reporting by Ben Hirschler; Editing by Dan Lalor)

*************

Related Links:

* Killer Avandia Drug Defenders Have Financial Ties To GlaxoSmithKline

Julie Steenhuysen, Chicago, Reuters

* FDA Pharma Reps Diddle As Glaxo’s Avandia Drug Causes Multiple Deaths

Vera Hassner Sharav, AHRP

From Corporate Crime Reporter.com

The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) carries a big public interest stick. It can mobilize the 850,000 people in its network to pressure corporations and governments. The goal – clean, safe, organic foods and products for America.

One way that OCA raises money – it charges for ads on the group’s popular web site – organicconsumers.org. Two companies had purchased logo space on the OCA web site – Organic Valley and Nature’s Path. Until last year. That’s when the groups dropped their sponsorship.

Under pressure from Whole Foods Market and United Natural Foods – the two companies that dominate the organics market – in the United States. That’s according to OCA’s national director Ronnie Cummins.

“National sponsors like Organic Valley and Nature’s Path have been threatened by Whole Foods and United Natural Foods that if they continue to support the Organic Consumers Association they will suffer repercussions in the marketplace,” Cummins told Corporate Crime Reporter in an interview last week.

“We had to take down those logos,” Cummins said. “We understand. We don’t want a company to go bankrupt simply because they support the right thing.” Cummins said high ranking executives at the Organic Valley and Nature’s Path told him about the threats – but asked that he not disclose their names.

“Whole Foods is very careful,” Cummins said. “Whole Foods has threatened to sue us a number of times. But they are very careful when they do this sort of arm twisting and intimidation to not leave any evidence of it. This was all verbally committed over the phone or in person.”

Cummins estimates that OCA lost a total of $40,000 in projected ad revenue as a result of the move. But he understands that Organic Valley and Nature’s Path can’t afford to offend Whole Foods and United Natural Foods – the main distributor of organic foods in the United States.

“Whole Foods sells $10 billion out of the $75 billion sold a year for the industry,” Cummins said. “So for most companies it’s at least 15 percent, but often up to 25 percent of their total sales. And it’s not just Whole Foods. United Natural Foods was in on it to.”

If they were cut off by those two, they would be driven out of business?

“You would go bankrupt immediately,” Cummins said. “We call Whole Foods and United Natural Foods the organic mafia. And it really is like that. There is tremendous fear in the industry to say anything critical of Whole Foods and United Natural Foods.”

When did Whole Foods and United Natural Foods begin pressuring OCA?

“It has happened over the past twelve months as we stepped up this campaign to expose the myth of natural foods,” Cummins said. “And at first, Whole Foods and United Natural Foods thought they could ignore the campaign. But then they noticed we had an alliance with the United Farmworkers and with the Teamsters.” Cummins wants Whole Foods and United Natural Foods to sign a Food Sustainability Pledge.

“That requires them to stop marketing conventional chemical foods as natural,” Cummins said. “And to sell only foods in their store that are certified organic or are in transition to organics. And it requires them to recognize fair trade principles – not just overseas, but in the domestic supply line.”

Whole Foods spokesperson Libby Letton said that Whole Foods did not pressure the two companies to pull the ads.

“For the OCA to continue to mislead consumers about Whole Foods Market and UNFI is alarming and disheartening,” Letton said. “When the OCA launched an untrue campaign against us last year, we did contact our stakeholders, including our suppliers, Team Members, and shoppers, because we wanted to clear up the misinformation that was being spread by the OCA’s campaign. We find it troubling that while the OCA accuses us of pressuring our suppliers against them, they openly call on Whole Foods Market to ‘put the pressure on’ suppliers to transition to organic.”

“Meanwhile, the truth is that Whole Foods Market continues to champion organics more than ever. We take enormous pride in working with hard-working and ethical organic farmers and food producers to offer our shoppers the very best organic products on the planet,” Letton said.

United Natural Foods could not be reached for comment.

[For a complete transcript of the Interview with Ronnie Cummins, see 24 Corporate Crime Reporter 12(12), March 22, 2010, print edition only.]