TRAVEL: Coming to reality

Quite an experience. As excited about setting off to our travel destinations (Eindhoven, Amsterdam, Hamburg and Lisbon), we were the same about coming back home to Madrid and being with our cat, Hendrix. Shannon and I talked about this while on the trip: we are definitely made for warm weather, and Hamburg definitely solidified that fact. 

After having some difficulty on finding ways to Madrid from Lisbon, we decided to take a 9ish hour bus ride. We sat in the back, and soon realized that this is quite the small world. Turned out that right next to us were sitting a Venezuelan couple, who lives in Miami, and both with ties to Orlando and UCF.

Anyways, we were happy to be back, and not so much about going back to work (who isn’t?) For me, work seemed like a fog, struggling to get back in the grind of things. Although I had a determination: to work harder and be better to what I set out to do, teach English. So far it’s going well, and I’m enjoying it a bit more than in November and December. As for Shannon, she’s decided that being an assistant is not right for her. 

Madrid is cold and windy now. However, spring is coming, and we are really excited. Right now, we’re planning our spring break trip, and we can’t wait to see what turns out. Next weekend though, we will be in the historical city of Granada, where Muslim architecture, markets, customs and much more remain after hundreds of years of Moorish control of Spain.

TRAVEL: Winter Vacation 2014/2015

I had never been much of a traveler.

Stories of exciting times abroad and the "you had to be there to believe it" expressions were merely a different world that I wouldn't experience anytime soon.

But I was wrong.

The year 2014 turned out to be quite the traveling one. Living in Madrid made everything so possible, so close, and so cheap. As many of you know, Ryan Air is a blessing, providing budget flights to many destinations in Europe and Morocco, and we definitely took advantage of it.

So much so that our trip consisted of four cities in three different countries. First on our destination was Eindhoven, in the southern part of the Netherlands. Wishing to see snow once there, we were granted our wish right away when our flight was delayed because of a snow storm. After getting our shoes wet in snow, and getting lost a little bit, we eventually found our hotel: Crown Inn. 

Nothing beats this view from the hotel, right?

Why Eindhoven? Because of the Van Gogh-Roosegaarde Bicycle Path close to Niemen. Unfortunately for us, the snow we wanted to see eventually made the path invisible, and hard to find on a late day.

However, Eindhoven was magical, and quite lovely. The small town feel was the best part about it, and the snow capped it off nicely.

On to Amsterdam. We arrived the 27th after taking a train there from Eindhoven. At first we were really excited for the city: the history, the internationalism of it, the food, all of it. We stayed just 10 minutes from the center in Diemen. We got a deal staying there than in the center.

So much to do in Amsterdam. The museums, the streets, the bikes, the diverse food, the Red Light District and the drugs all allure people to this city every year. But to us, it was not as special as we have heard countless times.

Yes, it is a great city, and yes, it has so much history. The architecture is fascinating, and the central station is quite the example. Also, Anne Frank's house and the City Archives bring you back to the city's history and its dealings with foreign invaders. Despite Amsterdam not meeting our expectations, we are set on coming back.

Hamburg was our first visit to Germany. I was really excited. Again, the history tells you so much about a place, and Hamburg definitely has it. However, the weather really hampered things for us, and the time of the year - New Year's Eve and New Year's Day. Being from Florida didn't help us either, and the wind constantly cut through our clothes when we tried to go outside. And when we did, most things were closed - quite the bummer.

Just as Amsterdam, Hamburg has great architecture, especially around the Town Hall area. Since the days of the German Confederation in the late 1800s, Nazi Germany, West Germany and unified Germany today, the city of Hamburg has reemerged to now compete with Berlin in hosting the 2024 Olympic Summer Games. Whoever wins will go against US cities - may the best win! (though there are some reports that Hamburg dropped its name from the national competition)

Lisbon, oh Lisbon. Already tired and wanting to go home and be with our cat, Hendrix, Lisbon never disappointed. The weather definitely helped, and our hostel as well. Be My Guest is a new hostel in Lisbon that is cheap, friendly, super clean, and overall fantastic. Meeting with Couchsurfers, getting lost in the old parts of the city, running into cats and visiting Belem were small jewels in our trip there.

Portugal definitely holds a special spot for us. Back in June 2014 when we went to Porto and fell in love with it, Lisbon again confirmed that Portugal is a cheap, warm and great traveling destination for everyone looking to get away.

So am I a traveler now?

I realized I always was, although I didn't notice that the excitement of finding a clean bathroom, a cheap grocery, laughing over something dumb, meeting new people, trying to speak a different language (and at the same time making a fool of yourself) is what a traveling, ever-learning soul is about.

Thank you Shannon.

The Income Inequality of the 21st Century

The 2008 world economic crisis had, and continues to have deepening effects in many parts of the world. The United States and the United Kingdom have had a gradual recovery, while the European Union continues to struggle with a sluggish growth and high unemployment in several of its southern Member States.

This week, the World Economic Forum is to meet in Davos, Switzerland to discuss the economic state of the world. Among the headlines is the news that by 2016, the world's top one percent will own the majority of the world's wealth. Now, this may come as a surprise to some of you, but obviously not to others. Thomas Picketty's book on capital inequality mentions this growing issue, and has alarmed many on what steps to reverse it.

Among those alarmed are OXFAM. They have taken the initiative to use their influence and call to those attending the meeting in Davos on what to do next. That may seem all good-willing, but actions are stronger than what OXFAM has offered to do about the rising inequality. Lets face it, the world's economy is where it's at because of the decisions our economic "leaders" took to save ourselves from a deeper mess in 2008.

The rich are richer because of decisions made at the highest level, and with graduate degrees from the top universities in the world, I am sure they knew exactly what they were doing. It's only when those decisions start affecting the majority, and their own assets that they start to do something about it.
In the United States, President Barack Obama is about to unveil a new economic plan during his State of the Union tomorrow - Tuesday, January 19th 2016 - that aim to do several things. According to Matt O'Brien of The Washington Post, Obama first wants to tax inheritances left from capital gains.

For many years this has been a loophole on avoiding taxes, and it could help the middle-class. Second, he would like to tax couples making more than half a USD million from 23.8 to 28 percent. O'Brien notes that the 28 figure was the same when Reagan left office.

Third, setting a .07 percent tax on liabilities done by banks with at least USD 50 million would encourage them to be more careful on their economic actions. These news have led some banks to possibly breaking up - a way more them to avoid the USD 50 million mark.

Actions are needed, and business leaders need to think more holistically. Their money only goes for far, and once it is too much what good will it do if it's only accumulating and sitting in a bank? Let those who need it to send their children to school, pay a hospital bill or make a mortgage payment enjoy what money is good for, making life better.

Statistics and information for this blog post is accredited to:
President Obama finally has his Piketty moment
New Oxfam report says half of global wealth held by the 1%

UN-Led Climate Negotiations, Are they effective?

When environmentalist are asked what is the most successful international legislation in recent history, they will say the Montreal Protocol of 1987. Aimed at reducing and ultimately phasing out the production and trade of CFCs harmful to the Earth's atmosphere, world leaders acted relatively quickly when compared to today's standards to apply the correct measures against increasing dangers from a weaker Ozone.

Although initial warnings of the dangers of CFCs were made in 1974, it took the international community over a decade to act. What is notable is that prior to Montreal, individual countries like the United States and the "Toronto Group" composed of mainly Nordic countries, passed domestic legislation eliminating the use and production of CFCs. Strong leadership within these governments as well as better scientific consensus helped the issue spring forward. Despite this, the early 1980s faced a decline in international participation for renewed doubt in the science of CFCs. At the time, the United Nations Environmental Programme was task with the challenge of renewing the efforts after a failed Vienna meeting a few years earlier to restart the talks. What followed was a string of agreements ultimately leading to Montreal in 1987 and London in 1990, where amendments and funding for developing countries were added.

So what does the Montreal Protocol have to do with current emission reduction negotiations? David G. Victor does a phenomenal job of explaining this in his book, Global Warming Gridlock, Creating More Effective Strategies for Protecting the Environment. In it, he argues that the current negotiating strategies are ineffective and will lead to more in-action. His reasoning is that policymakers and some mainstream environmentalists are relying on the mechanism the Montreal Protocol was established. Based off a goal-oriented and timetables method that is rather top-down from the UN to national governments, this was successful in Montreal because of different reasons. Among them was that CFCs had cheaper alternatives, the science was more certain on the levels needed to determine a "safe" level, and regulation of commitments on Montreal were and are largely self-enforcing.

Implementing the goal-oriented and timetables method to the global warming problem will only lead to more in-action, as mentioned earlier. Since fossil fuels are deeply embedded in the world's economy, cheap alternatives are still not readily available that would allow for the same function Montreal had. Moreover, the Copenhagen Accord agreement on limiting global temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius is, according to Victor, most likely going to be surpassed. This is because national governments need to understand what they are realistically able to do politically, and then come to the international negotiating table with numbers and not guesses. He also stresses that "legally binding" agreements are less effective because governments are more likely to be conservative in their reduction commitments. Instead, he suggests reduction agreements to be flexible and non-binding, leaving government with the incentive to increase their initial reduction otherwise seen with the binding agreements.

Unfortunately, species on the planet are headed for a warmer planet whatever reductions are implemented in the near future. As CO2 is a stock pollutant, it will take many years for levels in the atmosphere to drop unless a total stop of CO2 production is made very soon. This warmer planet will need adaptation and mitigation strategies that are not the main priority of governments. Instead, they hold hope that the world will evade the 2 degree mark. However, Victor states that realizing this scenario will help negotiations today, and tomorrow.

Jeffrey Sachs, professor at Columbia University's Earth Institute and special assistant to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon on sustainable development, is arguable seen as a proponent of the UN-led, goal-oriented agenda Victor precisely suggest against. This is interesting given the fact that with the recent Sustainable Development Solutions Network advocating for the UN-led strategy as part of its overall SD agenda.

Dr. Victor brings up an interesting alternative that looks promising given the constant gridlock on climate issues as seen with the recent Copenhagen Accord, and Rio+20. Should Dr. Sachs and the UN refocus their efforts and work with Dr. Victor, or should they stride with uncertain strategies that have already been repeated? What are your thoughts?

Indonesia and Palm Oil

Forest Conversion from WWF

Home to the Sumatran Tiger, Orangutan, Rhino and Elephant, plus a plethora of others species, Indonesia ranks as one of the most biologically diverse areas on the planet alongside Brazil and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Aside from being home to these species, the Indonesian tropical forests provide a substantial service to the world’s climate by absorbing carbon dioxide and creating oxygen. 

            This ecosystem service however, is under tremendous stress. Rise in world demand for palm oil have resulted in very high rates of deforestation, leaving many of its species in danger of poachers and displacement as a result of ensuing industrialization and destruction on their habitat. With Indonesia’s economy now running primarily on palm oil, efforts to decrease their rate of deforestation have been difficult as corruption is also rampant. 

            The high rate of deforestation must also dramatically decrease if climate scientists and the world has any chance of lowering greenhouse levels in maintaining global temperature within 2° C. It is very important for people throughout the world to understand what is happening in Southeast Asia. Learn what you can about Indonesia, and get the facts. Industry is currently winning there, but at the expense of the health of our planet and our future. 

            The Guardian recently posted ‘Indonesia’s deforestation is a disaster for the planet’ – audio slideshow. In this slideshow, you can see Paul Hilton’s account of what is occurring in the country. Take a moment from your day to watch this 6 min video, and understand what is occurring there to the animals and to our planet. The link to the audio slideshow is found below. 

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/audioslideshow/2014/apr/24/indonesia-deforestation-wildlife-paul-hilton-audio-slideshow?CMP=EMCENVEML1631

Who are Progressive Environmentalists?

Who are Progressive Environmentalists?

The traditional environmental movement has basic core principles, and one of them, is that there are limits to growth. This idea is embodied in several books, particularly one first published in 1972. The Limits to Growth was written by Donnella Meadows and others. Among environmentalists and policymakers, this book is highly regarded as one of its kind in the field. It used computer scenarios to predict population and economic growth in the twenty-first century, and what impact it would have on the planet. As the title states, the planet only has a finite amount of resources from which humans can utilize, and as you can imagine it, we are very near that limit according to Meadows et al. 

This notion of realistic limits to growth has been a fundamental component of environmentalists today and it is one in which many outside the field have come into realization today. However, there are individuals now dubbed Progressive Environmentalists who argue that there is no limit to growth, and if there is, we are very far from reaching it anytime soon. Among these Progressive Environmentalists are Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger who founded the Breakthrough Institute, which is dedicated to modernizing “liberal-progressive-green-politics.” 

While Nordhaus and Shellenberger are true environmentalists – since they do not reject climate change as environmental skeptics do – they have a different approach to solving today’s environmental problems. Their main argument is that capitalism at its finest – continued growth off the planet’s resources – is better than slowing growth for the purposes of alleviating the environment of its stresses. Bill Blackwater of the Monthly Review website states in summary of Nordhaus and Shellenberger’s point of view that “while energy efficiency fails to be good for the environment because it leads to economic growth, we should still pursue it because…it leads to economic growth, and this is good because it will make us richer.”  

What the Progressive Environmentalists fail to realize is that continued economic growth to the rest of the world to the point that they are at the same consumerist level of the United States will mean tremendous increases in carbon emissions, more natural disasters costing more money, and decreases in food productivity. The Limits to Growth displays our limits to all aspects of our planet, and not just a few that we can ignore in favor of continued and unsustainable economic growth as championed by the Breakthrough Institute and its members.