This week in News by Nature we looks at the politics of less-than-plenty in Popular Wisdom and below we have snippets of same for your sampling.

NBN is supposed to be an environmental website. So why are we devoting an issue to politics? Because in this day of diminishing natural resources, environmentalism is permeating every facet of politics. Here’s how we see it. Politics is the process of earning people’s support for governments that promise peace and prosperity in return. We’ll leave the peace part for another issue, but certainly America's free-market-focused politics has delivered on the latter, big time: we still have, by far, the world’s highest standard of living. But it’s all come at the expense of the environment and natural resources. Prosperity at the expense of natural resources has been the economic model for civilization worldwide since folks started farming and hunting in packs. That model worked fine when the world had endless resources, including an ever-growing population government could use to acquire those resources. But from clean water and air, to arable land and productive oceans—let’s not leave out oil—the planet is running out of natural resources. That is except for the ever growing population ever-more in need of natural resources and oh-so-easily talked into fighting for them when supplies run low. The world has people in over-stock, and NBN gets the creepy feeling these days that some countries have no problem with clearing out their inventories in the pursuit of natural resource. Now do you see why we’re writing about politics in an environmental website? Every day the environment plays a bigger role in everyday governance as corporations, countries and individuals compete for these dwindling resources. And as that competition gets more fierce, we either prepare to dramatically reduce populations or find a new economic model. That is assuming we want to save the planet. This country, despite all the hits it’s taken, is best poised to lead the way to this new economic model. The world is clearly at a crossroads and NBN thinks this country, as a world leader, is dangerously close to taking a wrong turn. In Popular Wisdom this week we have a story about a tiny Long Island village at a similar crossroads 12 years ago as an illustration of the risks involved in betting on economic expansion and how it can be so tempting to make those bets anyway. Below we have a handful of snippets also shedding light on the politics of less-than-plenty. Thank you for reading News by Nature.

Conservative Politics, 'Low-Effort' Thinking Linked In New Study How is this for liberal elitism: A Huff Post article citing one study saying conservatives are stupid and another saying they are lazy. Nobody with an IQ higher than their shoe size makes such statements. Sure enough, when the latter study’s author was asked to explain, he equivocated thusly: "Our research shows that low-effort thought promotes political conservatism, not that political conservatives use low-effort thinking." NBN would like to suggest conservative philosophies  appeal to people who are just plain too busy. Take a look at this 2008 election map. Red/conservative voters live in much more rural areas. They are less likely to work in offices and that probably means they work longer, harder hours than their city-dwelling counterparts. It also means if they aren’t working longer, harder hours they are outdoors enjoying all the wonderful recreation the same provides. That means they aren’t glued to Google News, CNN, and the New Yorker. Is it safe to say then that these folks are less informed and are forced to vote more with their hearts than with their heads? That does not make then stupid. However in a political system where governance is often bought by the highest bidder, it does make them dangerous.

Roger Scruton: Want to Save the Planet? Turn Right NBN waded through three quarters of this piece about a conservative environmentalist in Britain before unearthing information of some use. Beyond the bewilderment that such an animal exists, this fellow does, reluctantly, make a great point. All the big-government effort to advance environmentalism—think Kyoto— are probably no more effective in improving the planet than your hometown recycling efforts. Some 1,100 words into this article, we found this quote: “In other words, while it's straightforward for most people to see why they shouldn't litter, it's harder to attach importance to treaties concluded faraway by mostly unelected officials, the effects of which will be felt only indirectly. The environmental movement's task, Mr. Scruton argues, is to remind people why they should want clean air and green land in the first place—and to empower them to make the change themselves.” So true.

EPA orders AVX to take over harbor cleanup, complete it in eight years We can’t help but wonder how a President Romney would weigh in on this. Here’s a company that created a lot of jobs benefiting the surrounding community. It also created lucrative stock positions for thousands of investors now being ordered to dig deep, literally and figuratively, to accelerate the removal of PCB from Massachusetts’ New Bedford Harbor. Digging deep means some $400 million in the next decade or so after less than $100 million spent on the clean-up has essentially been futile. Even Exxon would struggle to come up with that kind of capital which promises no return on investment other than the heartfelt thanks of the Bedford Harbor community. Accordingly, the company spending this money will have less to invest in potential expansion which could create new jobs in the same community. The same thing is happening on a national scale. Government regulations increasingly hold industry to higher standards which siphons money from expansion potential. Maybe tax payers in the surrounding community that benefited from this company should now pick up at least more of the tab here instead turning it all over to the company? Either that or just resign themselves to living next to a polluted harbor.

  Poor, White, and Republican Finally, an explanation for the Tea Party. The incongruity of the nation’s poor whites pledging allegiance to a group fighting for the end of any assistance to the poor has always struck NBN as so counter intuitive. We’ve written it off to the coercive power of the Koch Brother’s cash but this New Yorker article disagrees. It says the organization of the Angry White Male into its firmest political force yet is due to the corrosive power of government cash. here are a few quotes from the article: A map showing areas of greatest reliance on public benefits corresponds with weird exactness to the map of red America: the South, Appalachia, and rural areas in general…All around him, (the angry white male) sees growing dependence on government. No fan of government spending, he joined the Tea Party in 2010; at the same time, he benefits from the Earned Income Tax Credit, free school breakfasts for his children, and Medicare for his mother…But the more he sees it, the more he resents the government. Perhaps he resents it most of all because he knows he needs it. That’s a political conundrum for both parties, but even more, it’s an American problem. If the quotes aren't clear that these people are pissed off for reasons they can't explain at have more to do with themselves than the state of the country, then look at the video above.

Rules of Engagement Here’s a Harvard professor conducting research on an outdated science: the evolutionary impact of social networks. We started reading it thinking the social networks referred to were social media. Any regular reader of this website knows the possible role of social media in human evolution is a hot topic. However, this guy is talking about real social networks like bars, parties and Kiwanis Clubs. He goes on to make some pedestrian point about how engagement in same can both, provide useful information while exposing folks to risks like catching the flu or meeting unsavory people. As we read through the piece our assessment of it started to gel.  But then a thought occurred that might make the article worthwhile. What if social media produced the same rewards as the real-life social networks, only without the risks? The news is full of stories of vulnerable people being taken advantage of, and worse, through online scams and predators. But how many more such stories do we hear of people being victimized by people they interact with in real life. Is it possible virtual socializing can cut down on the risks of real socializing. With Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest you’re not looking someone in the eye while talking to them. You’re not subconsciously registering all the subtle body movement and voice inflections that can more quickly earn your trust then if there were no such personal interaction. And you’re certainly not going to catch the flu from Facebook, although you can get bullied a bit.That doesn’t mean you can’t eventually forming a real relationship, weather social, professional or intimate, with online associates, it just means that you can know more about a person or group through online interaction before deciding you want to party, go hiking or something better.

DuPont Celebrates World’s Largest Solar Boat’s Successful Global Journey Powered by the Sun  This is just plain silly. How many millions, (tens of millions?) did DuPont spend on this little publicity stunt? In theory, in a free country, DuPont is clear to spent what it wants, where it wants. But this is supposed to be some sort of celebration of the promise of solar power. By a chemical company, no less. Yet, marine transportation is the most energy intensive mode of transportation there is. If we’re going to use fossil fuels they should be reserved for marine transportation only. Gas has the biggest bang for the bucket-full. What’s worse about this solar boat is the hull underneath is also useless for any other purpose. So both solar panel and boat are a waste of time and resources outside of the limited scope of a publicity stunt. Perhaps it’s possible the work going into the solar boat will produce developments that further the industry. We think  that if DuPont really wants to celebrate the potential of solar power, why not just fix these panels to a few thousand homes for free. Sorry, NBN can’t find anything good to say about this clearly well-meaning project.

Three Charts That Illustrate Why Solar Has Hit A True Tipping Point This article argues that the economics are lining up to edge the solar industry toward a tipping point: that prized ROI point where installing solar panels makes more sense than not. The article makes excellent points vis-à-vis the tipping point that NBN will reiterate here to entice you to read it yourself. 1) the economic potential for the technology in high resource areas is far bigger than actual deployment figures would suggest. That means places like the U.S. Southwest could be making a lot more money from solar installations than being made now. 2) The most important cost reductions in the next decade will come not through groundbreaking lab-scale improvements, but through incremental cost reductions due to deployment. 3) Solar is already comparable to fossil fuels in a variety of markets today.

Pennsylvania's acid mine water seen as drilling help In the earthly equations of pluses and minuses that increasingly must make up environmental law, the use of fouled coalmine water to use in hydraulic fracturing wells in Pennsylvania as outlined in this article proves a particularly ugly Hobson’s choice. Sadly, the author blathers away the first 1,000 words on the requisite quotes and official titles that show he did his job. The real news is at the bottom of the story. First it notes that abandon coalmines act as mini watersheds, channeling rainwater through what amount to huge coffee makers filled with coal industry discards, most notably a lot of coal. Apparently, the rainwater collected is contaminating many of the state’s watersheds. Next the article quotes the officials saying this water might instead be used to pump into fracking wells, except it’s uncertain how the chemical make-up of the mine water will serve, or not, the needs of the fracking operations. No mention is made of what the fracking folks will do with this water after they’ve used it, a major industry problem. The article also glosses over the costs of trucking the mine water to the well sites. Lastly the article says if this recycling effort were to meet the tests above then it would somehow allow state regulators and volunteer environmental organization more opportunity to divert rainwater away from the mines, cleaning up the state’s trout streams in the process. Sounds great on paper.