A Bit More Detail

• James Bow makes the case for inexpensive regional bus transit in southern Ontario, beyond and between the major cities.


• D-Brief explains why Pluto's Gate, a poisonous cave of classical Anatolia believed to be a portal to the netherworld, is the way it is.


• The Dragon's Tales takes a look at the plethora of initiatives for self-driving cars and the consequences of these for the world.


• Far Outliers takes a look at how Persia, despite enormous devastation, managed to eventual thrive under the Mongols, even assimilating them.


• JSTOR Daily notes the connections between North American nuclear tests and the rise of modern environmentalism.


• Language Hat looks at Linda Watson, a woman on the Isle of Man who has became the hub of a global network of researchers devoted to deciphering unreadable handwriting.


• Lawyers, Guns and Money makes the argument that the Russian hacks were only as effective as they were because of terrible journalism in the United States.


• The NYR Daily takes a look at an often-overlooked collaboration in the 1960s between New York poet Frank O'Hara and Italian artist Mario Schifano.


• Towleroad takes a look at out gay pop music star Troye Sivan.


• Window on Eurasia makes the believable contention that Putin believes in his propaganda, or at least acts as if he does, in Ukraine for instance.

Why? Because it gives the appearance that Clark and the BC government are holding out for the strongest assurances that there are, but in reality, it provides an out to take the economically expedient course and call that "world-leading" after the fact. The Liberals hardly have any motivation to do otherwise. If the Northern Gateway Pipeline is built, they will already have been turfed out of office by the time construction starts, and once the Northern Gateway Pipeline starts leaking it won't be the Liberals' problem--politically speaking, that is. But then, how many politicians in a position of power do you know who give a shit about anything else?

Lest you think I'm drawing long conclusions, keep in mind that Clark is the same premier who, just last month, announced that natural gas would be classified as a "clean" energy source because otherwise BC wouldn't be able to meet its clean energy targets once the liquified natural gas industry really starts going. [. . .]

The point here is that Clark has already demonstrated that she's more than willing to switch around definitions if she considers it advantageous to do so. Who's to say that, left vague and undefined, these "world-leading" prevention and response systems would be anything of the kind? What do you think is more likely--a government, especially this British Columbia government, doing the legwork and in-depth evaluations to ensure that the methods used are of the highest quality as per a carefully crafted, publicly transparent list of requirements to ensure the highest standard of pipeline safety... or for money or favors to change hands, so that whatever methods that end up being used end up being called "world-leading" because, well, who says what "world-leading" is anyway?

Let me ask you something: when's the last time you remember hearing about tens of thousands of people protesting the construction of a new coal-fired power plant? How often do you hear of Greens in government using what clout they have to engineer fossil fuel phaseouts? When was the last time you heard about a coal power plant being closed well before its intended lifespan ran out because of environmental concerns? For me, the answers to all three are "never." The closest thing to a coal protest I can remember is the event a couple of months ago, when people blocked a coal train near the border. Among all the jurisdictions in the world, Ontario is the only one I know of that has actively legislated an exit from coal power.

[. . .]

Meanwhile, coal power stations continue to belch their waste into the atmosphere. Even ignoring the issue of carbon dioxide emissions, the fact remains is that coal is the dirtiest source of power in existence. Coal plants emit sulfur dioxide, the main agent of acid rain. They emit hydrochloric acid. They emit fine particulates that can be inhaled and cause lung disease. They emit mercury. Some of these things, they emit tens of thousands of tonnes of it every year. when everything is working exactly as it's supposed to. They emit, and if they could I'm sure they would laugh as environmentalists furiously unload their chambers against nuclear, keeping their back to a force that's been steadily polluting the world for more than a century.

I would be disturbed, but I would not be particularly surprised, to find that environmental organizations like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club and so on have been financed in part by coal companies--because over the past forty years they've sure done a hell of a job to ensure that nobody cares about pollution from coal.

• Centauri Dreams' Paul Gilster raises the possibility of bringing an asteroid into lunar orbit, for scientific and space-settlement purposes both.


• Daniel Drezner is pleasantly surprised that the situation of Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng hasn't led to anything like a breakdown of Sino-American relations.


• Eastern Approaches notes the Polish holiday of "Flag Day" on the 2nd of May, commemorating the substantial Polish participation in the conquest of Berlin in 1945.


• Far Outliers' Joel discusses the Canary Islands and the role they played in the emerging imperium, both vis-a-vis Portugal and the later imperial strategies of unified Spain.


• Geocurrents describes the Sino-Soviet border disputes in eastern Siberia in 1969 that killed hundreds of people, nearly led to a Sino-Soviet war, and played a critical role in deciding the future of the world.


• Language Hat starts a discussion about the depressing plight of non-Russian languages inside Russia that quickly expands to include discussions of Turkish immigrants in Russia, the situation of Gaelic in Ireland, and Canada's own language situation.


• Laywers, Guns and Money reviews a book describing how environmentalism in the Colorado ski resort of Aspen helps to legitimate anti-immigrant sentiment.


• At NewAPPSBlog, Mohan Matthen makes the contrarian argument--compelling, but I think ultimately incorrect--that a "Oui" outcome in the 1995 Québec referendum would have been good for Québec and rump Canada both.


• Yorkshire Ranter Alexander Harrowell discusses the consequences of Bo Xilai's wiretapping of other officials in China, in the context of ubiquitous state surveillance generally.

The Conservatives said Sunday they are refocusing their primary aim on the NDP and the Green Party, citing them as a bigger threat to their reelection than the Liberals.

The Tories explained their dramatic shift in strategy, coming as the second week of the federal election begins, as being due to NDP Leader Jack Layton's rising popularity over that of Liberal Leader Stephane Dion - Prime Minister Stephen Harper's main target last week.

But the Conservatives also said that the NDP and Green Party are making significant inroads, not only in British Columbia and parts of the Prairies but in northern and southwestern Ontario.

"They're beginning to challenge the Liberals as our primary opponent in a number of key areas," a senior Conservative campaign source said Sunday. "Not just during the campaign but in the lead-up to the campaign, the NDP has played the role of the principal opposition to the government while the Liberals were abstaining from votes and retreated in a number of issues, the NDP were standing firm and opposing the government vigorously."

[. . .]

[Green Party Leader Elizabeth] May said the Greens are drawing support from disaffected Conservatives, and she cited the Ontario riding of Guelph, where she said the Green candidate was polling double the support of the Conservative candidate in the Sept. 8 byelection that was pre-empted by the federal election call.

"The Green Party is attracting enormous support from former Progressive Conservatives and from early supporters of (Canadian) Alliance and Reform who thought their party would be about grassroots democracy and ending the top-down rule in the old Conservative party," May said. "The Greens are actually eating into Mr. Harper's base. He does not want to admit it but that's what's happening.

But the senior Conservative official was willing to admit the growing strength of the Greens and NDP in a conference call Sunday with journalists.

"Splits can work for you in some place but they can also work against you," said the Conservative official, but noted that his party is seeing many disaffected Liberals gravitating toward the NDP and Greens.

"The changing landscape on the opposition side changes the splits. In some cases that's good for us, in some cases it's not."

A Globe-CTV poll released this morning shows strong support in key battleground ridings for Green Party Leader Elizabeth May's participation in the televised debates for the Oct. 14 federal election campaign.

The poll was conducted Tuesday and Wednesday by the Strategic Counsel in 45 of the most hotly contested ridings from Quebec, Ontario and British Columbia when debate was raging about whether she should be included.

On Wednesday, the broadcasters consortium reversed its earlier decision and invited Ms. May to the Oct. 1 and Oct. 2 debates.

The broadcasters made the change after Prime Minister Stephen Harper and NDP Leader Jack Layton both backed down from their opposition to Ms. May's involvement.

The Globe-CTV poll, released today, found 74 per cent of respondents in the B.C. battleground ridings, 73 per cent in the Ontario battleground ridings, and 67 per cent in the Quebec ridings polled support Ms. May's participation in the TV debates.

Unlike their European cousins, Canada's Greens are not consistently left-of-centre. They do talk of raising taxes on the wealthy. But they would also reduce government debt and cut the payroll taxes that small business owners hate.

They oppose corporate subsidies (as Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper once did). Like many small-c conservatives, they support a tax reform that would allow more women to stay at home.

May herself once worked as a political aide in former prime minister Brian Mulroney's Conservative government. Two years ago, she publicly lauded Mulroney as Canada's greenest prime minister.

She may not necessarily appeal to Harper's hard-right base. But she could interfere with his plans to woo centre-right and former Progressive Conservative voters.

Many voters, having heard of May, will want to see how she performs. If she does half the job she did on Sunday in her televised response to Harper's election call, they may well be impressed.

"Now is the time to wake up," she said then, in a forceful speech delivered without script or teleprompter. "To all of you who are disenchanted, dispirited, disappointed and disillusioned, this is the time for you to wake up and realize that the leadership does not exist at the series of podiums (of the other party leaders) you just watched this morning.

"The leadership is the people of this country. Because, in a democracy, the people are in charge."

So let us see what happens. In 1991, thanks to his performance in a televised debate, a relatively unknown British Columbian named Gordon Wilson managed to catapult his traditionally lacklustre provincial Liberal party from 7 to 30 per cent in the polls and win it official opposition status.

Wilson was later ousted as leader. But his party continued on to become, in 2001, B.C.'s government.

Which it still is.

In typical last minute style, I made a trip out to Home Depot to pick up a few things needed to put the final touches on the outdoor summer gazebo my brother and I built for my mother this morning (Happy Mother's Day!). I was pleasantly surprised to find that Toronto Hydro was there, giving away free clotheslines as part of their energy-saving promotion (a timely promotion that comes on the heels of a province-wide lifting of all municipal clothesline bans). I filled out the short survey, chatted briefly about CF light bulb recycling with the rep, and was on my way, free clothesline in hand.

When Edmontonians Pam and John Northcott bought their new home in Sherwood Park six years ago, they signed a lengthy restrictive covenant that aims to prevent unsightly additions to the neighbourhood.

No big TV dishes on the front lawn, no air conditioning equipment on the roof -- and no clotheslines.

"No outdoor clothes-hanging device shall be erected on any lot and no laundry, bedding or other such item shall be hung within any lot in any manner in which it is visible from any other lot," states the developer's covenant.

That bugs Pam, who sees clotheslines as an environmentally friendly and cheap way to dry clothes. In the summer months, she defies the covenant and discreetly hangs her washing under her deck to dry.

Taken literally, the developer's restriction wouldn't allow a homeowner to dry a beach towel outside or air a duvet, she said.

"I couldn't even shake my hanky out the window."

In a bid to curb the use of energy-sucking dryers, the new regulation will overrule neighbourhood covenants – part of the mortgage agreement between many developers and homebuyers – that outlaw clotheslines because they're considered unsightly.

The regulation, to take effect today, will not only prohibit new bans but also wipe out most that already exist, a provision that angered the province's building industry.

It will apply to free-standing and semi-detached homes and most row houses.

Highrise condos and apartments won't be affected for now. The province wants more consultation about them to deal with safety and other concerns.

Interviewers often remark upon the discrepancy between Lovelock's predictions of doom, and his good humour. "Well I'm cheerful!" he says, smiling. "I'm an optimist. It's going to happen."

Humanity is in a period exactly like 1938-9, he explains, when "we all knew something terrible was going to happen, but didn't know what to do about it". But once the second world war was under way, "everyone got excited, they loved the things they could do, it was one long holiday ... so when I think of the impending crisis now, I think in those terms. A sense of purpose - that's what people want."

At moments I wonder about Lovelock's credentials as a prophet. Sometimes he seems less clear-eyed with scientific vision than disposed to see the version of the future his prejudices are looking for. A socialist as a young man, he now favours market forces, and it's not clear whether his politics are the child or the father of his science. His hostility to renewable energy, for example, gets expressed in strikingly Eurosceptic terms of irritation with subsidies and bureaucrats. But then, when he talks about the Earth - or Gaia - it is in the purest scientific terms all.

"There have been seven disasters since humans came on the earth, very similar to the one that's just about to happen. I think these events keep separating the wheat from the chaff. And eventually we'll have a human on the planet that really does understand it and can live with it properly. That's the source of my optimism."

What would Lovelock do now, I ask, if he were me? He smiles and says: "Enjoy life while you can. Because if you're lucky it's going to be 20 years before it hits the fan."