Man Has A Technology Plan

We have technology which we understand and can deploy to 'help' the earth. We can begin seeding the atmosphere, seeding the ocean,and sequestering carbon. Wow, this is scary.

One idea is to up well ocean currents bringing the cold bottom water up near the surface. This would "help" plankton rapidly grow, thus taking in more carbon. In effect, we would create a world scale carbon vacuum cleaner; on a world scale!

While technologically speaking this might be wonderful, how will all the millions of natural wildlife, ocean environments, and the world current flow of the oceans be changed. We do not know. The oceans are one of the least explored and least understood environments on the planet.

And we want to start messing with mother nature for just our human benefit. What is wrong with that picture?

Land Will Go Fast - Forever Developed

We have 5 pieces of very diverse and different large parcels to target for Landicity members. We can only pursue these when members purchase a SquarK, SquarD or SquarP and upgrade.

So, while we have our pilot land in northern Maine, it sure would be nice to have members and potential members vote and select their favorite choice. So, go vote and let's make something happen. Check out the parcels and island here Maine Land and Island

These parcels will and are having considerable interests from people from away. A prince would like to buy the island and turn it into a colossal, individual and very private 2nd, or even 40th home. What a shame for us, nature and the island. The Maine culture will receive a tremendous shock if this happens.

According to a principal, there was a man on a very big yacht literally sitting on his yacht making calls to find the owner to buy the island.

We may have already lost the opportunity for the pristine lake with ~1,200 acres. I saw a sketch plan to break it up into a couple of private "Camp McMansions".

Where Does My Water Go?

Geologist, soil scientist and hydrologist types and any other wiki-type subject matter experts; where does my water go and is it really wasted?

For those of us on rural wells and septic systems and who do not simply have water and waste disapear down a big pipe, we would like to know some thing. If we turn on our faucet, and our well pumps water from the ground, and we then flush it down our toilet, where and how does it get transported -- in layman terms.

Our thinking might be, a gallon of water comes up and then goes back down, so is the water wasted from an environmental perspective?

Put another way, if we take a gallon out of the aquifer and then return it to the ground, what really happens? We all know water movers, flows and migrates. Have we permanently removed a gallon from the aquifer for it never to be returned? And, what is the real impact of taking a gallon out to begin with, especially if it is done slowly? Or, if it is done slowly, but there are hundreds of homes on say 1-2 acre parcels?

Can you 'go figure' this for us and tell us in layman's terms. We see it go back down in the soil, but "where does my water really go?"

Goodnight from Maine, USA

Pacific Ministroni Soup

Every where we look the nature sky seems to be falling. And maybe in some areas it is -- from human's perspective. As I have always voiced my opinion -- nature can, does and will take care of itself -- just by the very definition and historical span of nature. It is more powerful and will far outlive man.

Air is polluted (it has been much more so in history), global warming is occurring (it too has happened many times in the past) and animals are dying and becoming extinct (this has happened in dramatic steps in the past). The only difference today is man.

From our view and survivability it may well be dire times. Man, like other animals is part of nature. Except for our numbers, we are more "damaging" in our behavior than maybe other animals or swarms. Whales are very intelligent animals. So are dolphins. They probably knew enough about nature to live truly in harmony with her.

We are more obnoxious, arrogant and aggressive in our thinking that we should manage, control, direct, enhance, stop and be an adversary of nature. I think the only animal, natural wildlife or species that acts this way is man. Maybe nature does know what she is doing. First, she has created the most favorable weather, environment and "home" man could ever expect to see. Humans have blossomed during this period. It has been most favorable to our global expansion.

Now, maybe nature is growing and progressing into her next billion or two years. She very well may decide to "make extinct" humans just like other numerous animals have been instantly eliminated, how the earth was instantly polluted and made caustic, how the earth was heated and frozen before. Nature does not revolve around humans and hopefully never succumbs to man's perceived intellect. Let nature's weather continue -- let man's behavior not accelerate the rate of nature "deterioration".

Nature will have a tremendous challenge cleaning up from man applying his supposed higher intellect. A good example is essentially the world's largest circulating dump in the Pacific. There is a circular current that goes up our western coast, over to China and the Asian rim and then circles back down and over to our coast again. Literally, samples taken look like minestrone soup -- plastic not broken down but broken into confetti-like pieces in every color, swirling in what used to be the pristine nature waters. And, many many animals stomachs have carried and still are carrying literally tons of plastic in their bodies. It may not actually kill them, but how would you like a couple extra stones to carry around in your stomach -- constipated for life with plastic which does not break down, even in stomachs' acid. Then there was man; with his intellect, making plastics.

I believe every manufacturer of plastics and producers of packaging should incur the full life-cycle costs of their products and not pass these costs off to governments, communities and individuals like you and me, which they are doing every today.

If they invent, market and use materials don't let them offload disposal costs to us, in our dumps and in our oceans. Right now, they make things best for them and since other "costs" are easily transferred away, they have no market incentive to do otherwise. But if different manufacturers had to be directly responsible for these costs you would see instant change. We also would see instant human behavior change. If a product had a high life cycle cost, even though the core product might be cheapest, people would not buy it and manufactures would not sell the damaging and more "life cycle" costly product.

Pacific Minestrone Soup -- is another form of man's intellect. We are paying dearly for the transfer of these plastics because their true life cycle costs were made our problem by the perspective of product versus total life cycle product impact (cost).

Goodnight from Maine, USA

Green Is Soy or a New Greenwash!

I am up in Northern Maine, Guerette, Rte 161, on Cross Lake. It is God's country in the Potato Capital of the World -- Aroostook County -- "THE County".

In camp there is a candle with a sticker that says it is most green since it is a soy candle. When it burns, it is less harmful to the environment. Wow, I never knew that. I wondered how true this really is and more importantly even if this portion is true, what is the total life cycle womb to tomb greenie factor of this candle versus a bees wax candle? My suspicion is that it takes more of our human energy-type than the bees energy to make a soy candle.

Now I am getting a case of green anxiety syndrome. It is a new form of GAS not as global as methane, but can be just as deadly at the individual level. I avoided nature deficit syndrome to only learn I now have new GAS!

I am worried sick all my other candles are deadly but I don't know. What do I do? Will I get to sleep tonight?

WOW. Is that candle thing greenwashing -- is it successful if all we are advocating is just buying more stuff -- be green by buying more green stuff?

Less is more IS Green - not all these new labels that attract our inner psychological emotions. Did this soy exist before it was labeled green? Did they change their process, supply-chain, building health and energy plan too? Or, have they changed little in most areas, except their ability to greenwash?

Is soy soap a better way to wash with bio friendly, eco friendly, natural, organic and best green detergent? Is this true and real greenwash, not the inorganic marketing, labeling and PR-ering greenwash?

Some times I wonder if all of us should just be greener by buying the same stuff, less of it, and not all these new green things. Aren't we just adding to the problem if instead of 50 products, we are now making 100 products but consuming twice as much energy, resources, shipping and stuff? Well maybe if they are replacing 50 old non-green products with 50 new green products, that might be true and good? You think they are? Now I really have GAS!

Goodnight from Maine, USA

Thanks -- We Are Up and Official

Hi everyone and thanks to the many folks who have worked hard to get our site up and running.

We are launching our official out reach this week with an introduction to our "Kiss A Maine Moose" campaign.

For anyone willing to "Kiss A Maine Moose" we will offer them our Landicity Steward Membership and Deed to the Maine Wilderness.

Look for additional details here and in Facebook. We will let you know how to "Kiss Your Maine Moose".

Are we thinking straight on this?

Mother Earth is a resilent soul. She has been around for billions and billions of years. She evolves, morphs and balances all the forces that travel her way.

We on the other hand, are how old? Let's get this straight. We come onto the scene because of nature's forces. We may have evolved from tiny organisms that survive thermal vents, caustic environment and just unbelievable life chocking conditions. Maybe that, maybe aliens, maybe religious creationism.

Homo sapiens, an animal a part of nature just like any other thing, creature and life and not-so-life form on earth come onto the party very late in the game and we want to set nature straight. We get alarmed when species we are just discovering are threatened to extinction. Well the fact is, I think, more species have gone extinct in nature's billions and billions of years than homo sapiens 10's of thousands of year. And, if extinction had not occurred, the question could be would we have 'evolved" into the species we are today?

Let's get this straight. Is the question really about global warming, carbon offsets? Or, is the question can we easily fix some of these 'perceived ills' simply by doing with less, including less homo sapiens on the earth. Nature has her ways regulating life. Animals populations, evolution and existence cycles over a very long period.

Humans, since we are so highly intelligent and seemingly 'above nature' just need to stop creating so many humans at such a high rate. Investing in unproven, limited, and very short lived technology is not necessarily the best or only way.