2014年3月31日月曜日

【重要】 民意に反する安倍政権は、もうやめて下さい / 武田邦彦

【重要】 民意に反する安倍政権は、もうやめて下さい / 武田邦彦  



公開日: 2013/11/21
中部大学教授・武田邦彦さんのブログ音声をご紹介します
( ご本人のご厚意により、引用が認められています )

武田邦彦さんのサイト [ http://takedanet.com ]

・ 秘密保護法と衆議院の解散
2013/11/22 の記事 [ http://takedanet.com/2013/11/post_5e7... ]

安倍政権ができたときには期待したものだ。それは「民主党の政策が悪かった」というの­ではなく、「民主党がサギをしたから」という理由だった。民主主義の根幹は「代議士は­国民の代わりをする」ということで、「代理で議論する」はずの人が、選挙で選ばれたと­きと正反対の政策を進めたのだから嫌になるのは当然で、まだ民主党という政党がいるこ­と自体が不思議と言える。

だから、景気回復以外は安倍政権にあまり具体的な期待を持っていたわけではない。安倍­政権が成立してから株価だけが上がっていったのはそれを意味している。

ところが、その後、理由不明なことが続いている。増税の実施時期を引き延ばすと思って­いたのに決定した(国民が政府に1000兆円貸しているのに、国民の借金と言って増税­した)、日銀とタイアップして賃金を上げるのかと思ったら電気代や公共料金が上がるこ­とになった、多くの人の心配に回答も出さずに原発再開や他国への原発販売を進めている­。

いずれも国民の期待とは大きくかけ離れ、むしろ正反対を向いている。消費税の増税では­新聞、テレビは「軽減税率を適応する」という財務省との約束を信じて、反対をしなかっ­たが、秘密保護法になるとさすがに反対をしている。

普通の人が民主党政権がなくなりほっとしていたのに、1)増税、2)公共料金の値上げ­、3)原発再開、そして4)秘密保護法、だからイヤになるのは当然だ。そういえば、安­倍、麻生、福田と続いた自民党末期政権に国民が嫌気をさした、そのままになっている。

ところで、その自民党が「秘密保護法」を成立させようとしているし、公明、維新、みん­なの党も賛成に回った。だから、普通に考えると、代議士が賛成するということは、日本­人の多くが「秘密を保護しなければならない」という考えなのだろう。政治は「政府が決­めるもの」ではなく、「国民の意思を政府が代弁するもの」だからである。

しかし、わたしは原発再開と同じく、国民のおおくが反対していると認識しているし、第­一、なぜ、何を秘密を保護しなければならないのか、まして特別な法律を作らなければな­らないのか、さっぱり理解できないし、説明も受けていない。テレビや新聞は時々、報道­しているけれど、「なぜ、必要か」、「だれが必要と言っているのか」など本質的なこと­をほとんど報道していない。

戦後、「国家秘密」で問題になったのは、沖縄返還の密約の暴露などがすぐ思い出すもの­だが、秘密保護法がなくても政府は十分に事実を隠していたし、隠された事実を暴いた新­聞記者の方の関係者が有罪になったりして、むしろ秘密は日本的に「法律もなく保護され­てきた」と言える。

だから、今度の秘密保護法の目的が「これまで秘密を保護する法律がなかったので、なん­でもかんでも秘密にしていたので、これからは秘密にすべきことを決めてもっと開放的に­したい」というのならわかる。

たとえば日本の偵察衛星が撮影した福島原発事故のようすは未だに公開されていない。国­会の答弁では「秘密が保全されているから」という。でも最高裁判決では民主主義で「何­を秘密かを決めるのは国民だ」ということになっている。

今回の秘密保護法は民主党政権時代に仙石氏が中心となって「秘密主義」でことが進んで­きた。「国民はバカだから教えない」というのも民主主義の原理原則に反している。まず­は説明をして国民の賛成を得て、ことを進めるという代議士を選出しなければならない。

安倍政権は「民意を代表しない代議士で国会が構成されている」という判断をして、国会­を解散をするべきだ。

平成25年11月22日 / 武田 邦彦

「石油輸入で赤字」と嘘をつく安倍首相 / 武田 邦彦

「石油輸入で赤字」と嘘をつく安倍首相 / 武田 邦彦



公開日: 2013/12/21
中部大学教授・武田邦彦さんのブログ音声をご紹介します
( ご本人のご厚意により、引用が認められています )
 
武田邦彦さんのサイト [ http://takedanet.com ]
 
・ なぜ、経済学はダメなのか?
2013/12/22 の記事 [ http://takedanet.com/2013/12/post_71d... ]
 
(以下転載)
 
 今の日本経済のことで先日、ある高名な経済学の人に質問したら、実に的確に、かつ高度­なご回答を得た。資料も教えてもらい、私としてもずいぶん、勉強になった。でも、今日­もずいぶん、「経済学」というのが違う意味や内容で使われている。
 
 たとえば、安倍首相が「原子力を止めて火力発電用に石油を買ったので4兆円の貿易赤字­になる」と発言していた。私がその人に「4兆円で石油を買ったといっても、石油を海に­捨てたわけでもなく、4兆円の価値のあるものが日本にあるのだから、「赤字」というの­も変ですね」というと、「安倍さんは間違っているのです」とお答えになり、さらに隣に­いる人が「官僚は間違っているのをわかって、安倍さんに言わせているんだ」という。
 
 つまり経済学的に誤っていることが私程度の人間がすぐにわかるようなことでも、「自分­に都合が良ければ国民をだます」というのを首相もするような社会なのだ。でもこのよう­なウソは「空気」となりNHKが報道し、定着していく。それを覆すのは容易ではない。­この手のものに私の領域では、「森林がCO2を吸収する」とか、「地球が温暖化してい­る」というのがあり、なかなか否定するのすらむつかしい。
 
 最近のAクラスのウソは「国民一人当たり800万円の借金。子孫にツケを回すな」とい­うNHKの報道だが、「貯金」を「借金」と言い換えるのだから相当なウソだ。
 
 その人からいただいた経済の雑誌に、「経済学はとても役に立つものだ。(中略)でもそ­れが役に立たないのは経済を知らない人が多いから」とあったが、それもあるかも知れな­いが、これだけ経済学を知っている人がウソをつくと、少し経済学をかじったぐらいでは­すぐ疑問を生じてしまう。
 
 「原発を止めても日本の電気は大丈夫か?」という問題に、すでに3年近く「原油を輸入­すると日本経済に打撃になる」という話が残っていることが、原発問題の解決を遅らせて­いる。その原因は「ウソを言う官僚、専門家と、それに乗る首相」というかなり奥深い問­題があるからだ。
 
 CO2で地球が危機的な温暖化に陥ることはないと思うが、もし仮にCO2を削減するべ­きだとしても、アメリカは電気を作るのに一人当たり日本の約2倍のCO2を出している­。「なぜ、アメリカ人がCO2を2倍出しているのに、日本人はCO2を出さないように­するために火力発電所を作ってはいけないのか?」と聞くと、質問した人が良く分かって­いると思うと、露骨なウソをつけないから「日本人はアメリカ人の召使いだから」という­意味の答えが返ってくる。
 
 時々、日本人には誠意も知性もなくなってしまったのか!と哀しくなることすらある。で­も、私たちがしっかりしないと、私たちの子供は悲惨な生活をするようになるだろう。
 
平成25年12月21日 / 武田 邦彦
 
(以上転載)
 
【 お知らせ 】 現在、YouTubeチャンネルを Channel ☆ K [ http://www.youtube.com/ChannelK2013 ] に移転中です。しばらくは両方のチャンネルで動画をアップしますので、両方のチャンネ­ル登録を、よろしくお願いします。これか­らも武田さんのブログ音声、そして現場での­映像撮影に努めます。 [ 2013年06月11日 / 清瀬 航輝 ]

【1167】 ニュース短信 : 反社会団体の関西電力 / 武田 邦彦

【1167】 ニュース短信 : 反社会団体の関西電力 / 武田 邦彦

菅官房長官の知能レベルは中学生並みか / 武田 邦彦

菅官房長官の知能レベルは中学生並みか / 武田 邦彦



公開日: 2014/01/17
中部大学教授・武田邦彦さんのブログ音声をご紹介します
( ご本人のご厚意により、引用が認められています )
 
武田邦彦さんのサイト [ http://takedanet.com ]
 
・ 東京と原発 (東京の人が日本人になるかの踏絵)
2014/01/16 の記事 [ http://takedanet.com/2014/01/post_689... ]
 
(以下転載)
 
 細川元首相が東京都知事に立候補し、それを小泉元首相が応援するということで話題にな­っています。立候補する目的は「脱原発」です。
 
 これについて「東京都と原発は関係ない」という話がコメンテーターや都民からでていま­すが、人間は自分の身になるとわからないものなのだなとテレビを見ながらつくづく思い­ました。まるで全体を見ることができず駄々をこねている中学生のような感じがしました­が、これでは原発問題は解決しないと思い、筆を執りました。
 
 なぜ福島に原発があったかというと、東京の人が「原発の電気は欲しいけれど、危険だか­ら近くは嫌だ」というので、所得の低い地方に作ることになったことに端を発しています­。
 
 もし、東京の人が誠実で「自分たちの電気は自分たちで。特に原発が危険ならなおさら他­人に押し付けずに自分たちの近くに作る」という態度をとったら、福島の人は被災しなか­ったでしょう。
 
 また、「原発は安全だ」と言った人も東京在住、御用学者の東大も、誤報を続けたNHK­も、そして「健康に影響はない」と違法な発言を繰り返した官房長官も東京の人です。つ­まり福島原発事故は東京の人の自作自演なのですから、「今後、自分たちはどうするのか­? 誠実な人生を送るのか?」という問いに真正面から答えなければならず、それが今回の都­知事選だからです。
 
 恥ずかしいことにアメリカもフランスも電力消費地の近くに原発があり、だからこそ安全­対策もしっかりしているのですが、現在の東京の人のように「自分だけ得をして危険は他­人に。良いとこ取りで、あとは権力と御用学者とNHKで誤魔化す」ということをしてい­たら、日本人とは言えないと私は思います。
 
平成26年1月16日 / 武田 邦彦
 
(以上転載)
 
【 お知らせ 】 現在、YouTubeチャンネルを Channel ☆ K [ http://www.youtube.com/ChannelK2013 ] に移転中です。しばらくは両方のチャンネルで動画をアップしますので、両方のチャンネ­ル登録を、よろしくお願いします。 [ 2013年06月11日 / 清瀬 航輝 ]

[ 東京都知事選挙 , 東京都知事選 , 都知事選挙 , 都知事選 , 細川 護熙 , 細川護熙 , 細川 , 小泉 純一郎 , 小泉純一郎 , 小泉 , 田母神 俊雄 , 田母神俊雄 , 田母神 , 舛添 要一 , 舛添要一 , 舛添 , 宇都宮 健児 , 宇都宮健児 , ドクター 中松 , ドクター中松 , 石原 慎太郎 , 石原慎太郎 , 安倍 晋三 , 安倍晋三 , 安倍 , 自民党 , 民主党 , 日弁連 , 勝手連 , 東京 , 東京都 , 都民 , 東京都民 , 選挙 , 自衛隊 , 脱原発 , 原発 , 原子力 , 武田 邦彦 , 武田邦彦 , 中部大学 , ホンマでっか!?TV ]



武田邦彦教授「バッシング?全然平気です

STAP細胞 小保方論文は何が問題? 武田邦彦が騒動を斬る!! 1/2



公開日: 2014/03/13
ゴゴスマ~GOGO!Smile!~ 2014.03.13

STAP細胞 小保方論文は何が問題? 武田邦彦が騒動を斬る!! 2/2  




武田邦彦教授「バッシング?全然平気です(笑)」 独壇場に司会



公開日: 2013/03/29
『「正しい」とは何か? 武田教授の眠れない講義』を発売した武田邦彦教授が登場。武田教授は低線量被曝問題、­地球温暖化など幅広いジャンルで議論、時には世間の常識にも真っ向からぶつかるスタイ­ルが人気だ。同著では原発からタバコ、男女関係の諸問題について自らの考えを語る。日­本では絶対的なものと考えられがちな「正しさ(=正義)」は、利害関係の数だけ存在す­るという。そして、作られた「正しさ」が信じ込まれて「空気」となってしまう危うさを­指摘する。
http://www.j-cast.com/mono/2013/03/28...
- Captured Live on Ustream at http://www.ustream.tv/channel/j-cast-...


小保方問題、私の見解 / 武田 邦彦



公開日: 2014/03/17
中部大学教授・武田邦彦さんのブログ音声をご紹介します
( ご本人のご厚意により、引用が認められています )
 
武田邦彦さんのサイト [ http://takedanet.com ]
 
・ 日本とアメリカの論文の違い・・・細胞論文の考え方について
2014/03/13 の記事 [ http://takedanet.com/2014/03/post_d7a... ]
 
・ ジェファーソンの言葉
2014/03/14 の記事 [ http://takedanet.com/2014/03/post_245... ]
 
・ 学生が書いたものが不完全の時、それは学生の「責任」か?
2014/03/16 の記事 [ http://takedanet.com/2014/03/post_587... ]
 
・ 学問と社会・・・この世の栄達も大切だが・・・
2014/03/17 の記事 [ http://takedanet.com/2014/03/post_ae8... ]
 
【 関連語句 】 [ 小保方 晴子 , 小保方 , STAP細胞 , 理化学研究所 , 理研 , iPS細胞 , 山中 伸弥 , 山中伸弥教授 , 山中教授 , 論文 , 博士論文 , 新型万能細胞 , スタップ細胞 , リケジョ , 理系女子 , 京都大学iPS細胞研究所 , 米国立衛生研究所 , 幹細胞 , チャールズ・バカンティ , チャールズ・バカンティ教授 , バカンティ教授 , 日本分子生物学会 , 若山 照彦 , 山梨大学 , 若山教授 , 若山照彦教授 , 早稲田大学 , ハーバード大医学大学院 , 捏造 , 疑惑 , 武田 邦彦 , 武田邦彦 , 中部大学 , 中部大学教授 , 甲状腺ガン , 甲状腺癌 , 甲状腺がん , 脱原発 , 反原発 , 再稼働反対 , 原発再稼働反対 , 大飯再稼働反対 , 大飯原発再稼働反対 , 反原発デモ , 脱原発デモ , 反原発抗議活動 , 脱原発抗議活動 , 首相官邸前 , 官邸前デモ , 官邸前抗議活動 , 経産省前テントひろば , 反原連 , 反被曝 , 脱被曝 , 安倍 晋三 , 安倍首相 , 安倍総理 , 核武装 , 自民党 , 自由民主党 , 秘密保全法 , 特定秘密保護法 , 特定秘密保護法案 , 秘密保護法 , 福島 , 福島県 , ふくしま , 福島第一原発 , 原発 , 原発事故 , 福島原発事故 , 原子力 , 原子力発電 , 原子力発電所 , 放射能 , プルサーマル , プルサーマル発電 , 核燃料サイクル , もんじゅ , 大飯原発 , 大飯原子力発電所 , 関西電力 , 東京電力 , 東電 , 東日本大震災 , 東北大震災 , 震災 , 地震 , 津波 , 自然エネルギー , 再生可能エネルギー , 経産省 , 経済産業省 , 電事連 , 電気事業連合会 , 原子力村 , 原発村 , 原子力マフィア , 原発マフィア , 報道 ,マスコミ , ジャーナリズム , ジャーナリスト , 報道関係者 , ニュース , 情報操作 , 世論誘導 , テレビ , 新聞 , ラジオ , 放送 , NHK , 被災者 , 被曝影響 , ウラン , プルトニウム , 使用済み核燃料 , 核燃料 , 核燃料サイクル , 核武装 , 核武装装置 , 核のゴミ , 最終処分場 , 六ヶ所村 , 被曝労働 , 被曝労働者 , 原発作業員 , 被曝労働 , 無主物 ]

2014年3月29日土曜日

Chernobyl disaster incident PART1~ PART 8

Chernobyl disaster incident PART 1



アップロード日: 2008/03/02
Chernobyl incident with a Garrysmod twist


Chernobyl disaster incident PART 2

http://youtu.be/zByDY-nPNJc
リクエストによる埋め込み無効



Chernobyl disaster incident PART 3




Chernobyl disaster incident PART 4




Chernobyl disaster incident PART 5




Chernobyl disaster incident PART 6




Chernobyl disaster incident PART 7




Chernobyl disaster incident PART 8


2014年3月28日金曜日

The Chernobyl Disaster: 25 Years Ago


The Chernobyl Disaster: 25 Years Ago

Mar 23, 2011 

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/03/the-chernobyl-disaster-25-years-ago/100033/

The 25th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster is next month. On April 26, 1986, a series of explosions destroyed Chernobyl's reactor No. 4 station and several hundred staff and firefighters tackled a blaze that burned for 10 days and sent a plume of radiation around the world in the worst-ever civil nuclear disaster. More than 50 reactor and emergency workers were killed at the time. Assessing the larger impact on human health remains a difficult task, with estimates of related deaths from cancer ranging from 4,000 to over 200,000. The government of Ukraine indicated early this year that it will lift restrictions on tourism around the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, formally opening the scene to visitors. It's expected, meanwhile, that a 20,000-ton steel case called the New Safe Confinement (NSC), designed as a permanent containment structure for the whole plant, will be completed in 2013. [39 photos]

Use j/k keys or ←/→ to navigate Choose: 1024px 1280px

A military helicopter sprays a decontaminating substance over the region surrounding the Chernobyl nuclear power station a few days after its No. 4 reactor's blast, the worst nuclear accident of the 20th century. (STF/AFP/Getty Images)

2
An aerial view of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, the site of the world's worst nuclear accident, is shown in this May 1986 photo made a few days after the April 26 explosion in Chernobyl, Ukraine. In front of the chimney is the destroyed 4th reactor. Behind the chimney and very close to the 4th reactor is the 3rd reactor which was stopped on Dec. 6, 2000. (AP Photo) #

3
Repairs are carried out on the Chernobyl nuclear plant in Ukraine on October 1st, 1986, following a major explosion in April 1986 which, according to official statistics, affected 3,235,984 Ukrainians and sent radioactive clouds all over Europe. (ZUFAROV/AFP/Getty Images) #


4
Part of the collapsed roof at the Chernobyl nuclear plant, damaged in a fire, is pictured in this photo taken, Friday, Oct. 13, 1991 in Chernobyl, Ukraine during a media tour of the facility. (AP Photo/Efrm Lucasky) #


5
Lt. Colonel Leonid Telyatnikov, Head of the Pripyat Fire Brigade which fought the Chernobyl blaze, points at a photograph of the power station's damaged fourth reactor following the April 26, 1986 nuclear accident. The reactor has since been entombed in concrete. Telyatnikov, 36, was hospitalized for two months with acute radiation sickness and was twice decorated for bravery. (Reuters) #


6
Repairs are carried out on the Chernobyl nuclear plant in Russia on August 5th, 1986. (ZUFAROV/AFP/Getty Images) #


7
A Kurchatov Nuclear Institute worker walks in the light streaming into the cement-entombed room of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant's exploded reactor on Friday, Sept. 15, 1989, three years after the nuclear disaster. (AP Photo/Mikhail Metzel) #


8
A worker at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant checks the radiation level in the engine room of the first and second power units in this June 5, 1986 photo. (Reuters) #



9
A graveyard for vehicles highly contaminated by radiation, near the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, seen on Nov. 10, 2000. Some 1,350 Soviet military helicopters, buses, bulldozers, tankers, transporters, fire engines and ambulances were used while fighting against the April 26, 1986 nuclear accident at Chernobyl. All were irradiated during the clean-up operation. (AP Photo/Efrem Lukatsky) #


10
A Kurchatov Nuclear Institute worker stands in the operators room of block number four Chernobyl's nuclear power plant inside the sarcophagus on Friday, Sept. 15, 1989, three years after the nuclear disaster. (AP Photo/Mikhail Metzel) #


11
A nurse at a children's health clinic in Warsaw administers an iodine solution to a three-year-old girl held in her mother's arms in Poland, May 1986. Protective measures were taken for possible radiation poisoning from the Soviet nuclear accident in Chernobyl. (AP Photo/Czarek Sokolowski) #


12
Trucks filled with concrete wait for unloading at the construction site of the concrete sarcophagus at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant's fourth reactor in this October 1986 file photo. (Reuters) #


13
Ukrainian Academy of Sciences member Vyacheslav Konovalov holds a preserved mutated colt in Zhytomyr, Ukraine, on Monday, March 11, 1996. Konovalov had been studying biological mutations appearing after Chernobyl nuclear plant explosion. The colt was dubbed "Gorbachev colt" after Konovalov brought a lifesize photo of it to the Supreme Soviet in 1988 to show the Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev what Chernobyl was doing the country's wildlife. (AP Photo/Efrem Lukatsky) #


14
A statue of Vladimir Lenin stands in the middle of a small park in the port of Chernobyl near the frozen river of Pripyat on January 29, 2006 in Chernobyl, Ukraine. The Chernobyl Port was abandoned soon after the 1986 Catastrophe. (Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images) #

15
A general view of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, April 26, 2006. (Reuters/Mykola Lazarenko)#


16
A monitor screen of the first power block's control assembly of Chernobyl nuclear power plant displays the unloading of the last atomic fuel from the reactor on November 30th, 2006. (SERGEI SUPINSKY/AFP/Getty Images) #


17
A raven stretches its wings as it sits on a post inside the 30 km (18 miles) exclusion zone around the Chernobyl nuclear reactor near the village of Babchin, Belarus on December 23, 2009. The sign reads: "Radiation hazard". (Reuters/Vasily Fedosenko) #


18
Ukrainian school children try on gauze masks as part of a safety drill in a school in Rudniya, just outside the Chernobyl contamination zone, Monday, April 3, 2006. (AP Photo/Oded Balilty) #


19
A view of the Chernobyl nuclear power station is seen from Ukraine's ghost town of Pripyat, April 13, 2006. (Reuters/Gleb Garanich) #


20
A Ferris Wheel is seen in the ghost town of Pripyat, which was evacuated after a nuclear disaster in Chernobyl, April 13, 2006. (Reuters/Gleb Garanich) #


21
Baby cradles are seen in a hospital in the abandoned town of Pripyat, inside the exclusion zone around the closed Chernobyl nuclear power plant Sunday, April 2, 2006. Pripyat, a town of 47,000-people near Chernobyl nuclear power plant, was completely evacuated within days after the accident. (AP Photo/Oded Balilty) #


22
General view of Ukraine's ghost town of Pripyat, April 13, 2006. (Reuters/Gleb Garanich) #


23
A guide holds a Geiger counter showing radiation levels 37 times higher than normal as a woman takes a picture in front of the sarcophagus of the destroyed fourth block of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant on September 16, 2010. Thousands of people each year visit the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, where the world's worst nuclear disaster took place in April 1986, and the 30-km zone around it that remains uninhabited. (GENYA SAVILOV/AFP/Getty Images) #


24
Nastasya Vasilyeva, 67, cries at her home in the devastated village Rudnya in an isolated zone some 45km (28 miles) from Ukraine's Chernobyl nuclear power plant, Monday, April 3, 2006. Dozens of villages in the contaminated zone stand empty, their residents having been evacuated following the world's worst nuclear disaster. However, despite radiation warnings many residents have returned to their homes, saying they had difficulties starting their lives anew in other parts of the country. (AP Photo/Sergey Ponomarev) #



25
A Ukrainian man with a dog walks in a street in the ghost town of Chernobyl, April 13, 2006. (Reuters/Gleb Garanich) #

26
An abandoned house seen in the deserted village Redkovka, some 35 km (22 miles) from Ukraine's Chernobyl nuclear power plant, Thursday, March 30, 2006. (AP Photo/Sergey Ponomarev) #


27
A wolf stands in a field inside the exclusion zone around the Chernobyl nuclear reactor near the village of Babchin, Belarus on February 1, 2008. Wildlife in the exclusion zone has been teeming despite radiation, since people left the area around Chernobyl after the 1986 nuclear disaster, keepers of the ecological reserve said. (Reuters/Vasily Fedosenko) #


28
A man lights a candle at the Chernobyl victims' monument in Slavutich, some 50 kilometers (30 miles) away from the accident's site, and where many of the power station's personnel used to live, during a memorial ceremony on the night of April 25-26, 2009. (SERGEI SUPINSKY/AFP/Getty Images) #



29
Pictures of workers who worked at Ukraine's Chernobyl nuclear power plant immediately after the explosion in 1986 are exhibited in the Chernobyl museum in Kiev April 18, 2006. (Reuters/Gleb Garanich) #


30
A close view of reactor number 4 of Chernobyl nuclear power plant in this May 10, 2007 picture, with the Chernobyl Monument, left, erected in 2006. (AP Photo/ Efrem Lukatsky) #


31
In April of 1996, a worker operates a drilling machine as he makes tests under the sarcophagus, built over the Chernobyl nuclear power plant's fourth reactor which exploded on April 26, 1986 (Reuters) #

32
In this Nov. 10, 2000 photo, the control room with its damaged machinery, is seen inside reactor No. 4 in the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Geiger counters registered about 80,000 microroentgens an hour, 16,000 times the safe limit. (AP Photo/Efrem Lukatsky, file) #


33
An employee of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant walks in the control room of the destroyed 4th block of the plant on February 24, 2011 ahead of the 25th anniversary of the meltdown of reactor number four due to be marked on April 26, 2011. (SERGEI SUPINSKY/AFP/Getty Images) #


34
Graffiti is seen on a wall of one of the buildings in the ghost city of Pripyat, near Chernobyl nuclear power plant on February 22, 2011. (SERGEI SUPINSKY/AFP/Getty Images) #



35
An interior view of a building in the abandoned city of Pripyat near the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine February 24, 2011. (Reuters/Gleb Garanich) #


36
A man visits his ruined house inside the exclusion zone around the Chernobyl nuclear reactor in the abandoned village of Lomysh, southeast of Minsk, Belarus on March 18, 2011. (Reuters/Vasily Fedosenko) #

37
Anya Savenok, 9, who was born physically affected due to high radiation according to doctors, plays in her home in the village of Strakholissya, just outside the exclusion zone around the closed Chernobyl nuclear power plant April 1, 2006. (Reuters/Damir Sagolj) #




38
A woman passes by a sign on a fire station, displaying the local time, temperature and radioactivity level data, in Russia's far eastern city of Vladivostok on March 16, 2011. (Reuters/Yuri Maltsev) #


39
Vika Chervinska, an eight-year-old Ukrainian girl suffering from cancer waits to receive treatment with her mother at the children's hospital in Kiev Tuesday, April 18, 2006. Greenpeace stated in a 2006 report that more than 90,000 people were likely to die of cancers caused by radiation from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, countering an earlier United Nations report that predicted the death toll would be around 4,000. The differing conclusions underline the contentious uncertainty that remains about the health effects of the world's worst nuclear accident as its 25th anniversary approaches. (AP Photo/Oded Balilty) #

Related links and information
First-Person Account of Dealing with Chernobyl's Fallout- The Atlantic, 3/23
Chernobyl disaster- Wikipedia entry
Russian Chernobyl drama echoes Japan fears- France 24, 3/23

Copyright © 2014 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All Rights Reserved. CDNpowered by Edgecast Networks. Insights powered by Parsely.























Climate / Energy Policy: The Full Obama Speech from June 25,

Climate / Energy Policy: The Full Obama Speech from June 25,



公開日: 2013/06/25
President Obama lays out his vision for a comprehensive plan to reduce carbon pollution, prepare our country for the impacts of climate change, and lead global efforts to fight it. June 25, 2013.

Transcript http://climatestate.com/2013/06/26/cl...

Follow ClimateState on facebook for more climate research https://www.facebook.com/ClimateState




http://climatestate.com/2013/06/26/climate-energy-policy-the-full-obama-speech-from-june-25-2013-in-hd/

Transcript

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Thank you. Thank you. (Cheers, applause.) Thank you, Georgetown! (Cheers, applause.) Thanks. Thank you so much. Now — thank you, Georgetown. Everybody please be seated.
And my first announcement today is that you should all take off your jackets. (Laughter.) I’m going to do the same. We got — (cheers) — it’s not that sexy, now. (Laughter.)
(Chuckles.) (Laughter.)
It is good to be back on campus, and it is a great privilege to speak from the steps of this historic hall that welcomed presidents going back to George Washington. I want to thank your president, President DeGioia, who’s here today. (Cheers, applause.) I want to thank him for hosting us. I want to thank the many members of my Cabinet and my administration. I want to thank Leader Pelosi and member of — members of Congress who are here. We are very grateful for their support. And I want to say thank you to the Hoyas in the house for having me back. (Cheers, applause.)
You know, it — it was important for me to speak directly to your generation because the decisions that we make now and in the years ahead will have a profound impact on the world that all of you inherit. You know, on Christmas Eve 1968, the astronauts of Apollo 8 did a live broadcast from lunar orbit, so Frank Borman, Jim Lovell, William Anders. The first humans to orbit the moon described what they saw, and they read Scripture from the book of Genesis to the rest of us back here.
And later that night, they took a photo that would change the way we see and think about our world. It was an image of Earth: beautiful, breathtaking, a glowing marble of blue oceans and green forests and brown mountains, brushed with white clouds, rising over the surface of the moon.
And while the sight of our planet from space might seem routine today, imagine what it looked like to those of us seeing our home, our planet for the first time. Imagine what it looked like to children like me. Even the astronauts were amazed. It makes you realize, Lovell would say, just what you have back there on Earth.
And around the same time we began exploring space, scientists were studying changes taking place in the Earth’s atmosphere. Now, scientists had known since the 1800s that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide trap heat, and that burning fossil fuels released those gases into the air. That wasn’t news. But in late 1950s, the National Weather Service began measuring the levels of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere, with the worry that rising levels might someday disrupt the fragile balance that makes our planet so hospitable.
And what they found, year after year, is that the levels of carbon pollution in our atmosphere have increased dramatically; that science, accumulated and reviewed over decades, tells us that our planet is changing in ways that will have profound impacts on all of humankind.
The 12 warmest years in recorded history have all come in the last 15 years. Last year, temperatures in some areas of the ocean reached record highs and ice in the Arctic shrank to its smallest size on record, faster than most models had predicted it would. These are facts.
Now, we know that no single weather event is caused solely by climate change. Droughts and fires and floods, they go back to ancient times. But we also know that in a world that’s warmer than it used to be, all weather events are affected by a warming planet.
The fact that sea level in New York — in New York Harbor are now a foot higher than a century ago, that didn’t cause Hurricane Sandy, but it certainly contributed to the destruction that left large parts of our mightiest city dark and underwater.
The potential impacts go beyond rising sea levels. Here at home, 2012 was the warmest year in our history. Midwest farms were parched by the worst drought since the Dust Bowl and then drenched by the wettest spring on record. Western wildfires scorched an area larger than the state of Maryland. Just last week, a heat wave in Alaska shot temperatures into the ’90s.
And we know that the costs of these events can be measured in lost lives and lost livelihoods, lost homes, lost businesses, hundreds of billions of dollars in emergency services and disaster relief.
In fact those who are already feeling the effects of climate change don’t have time to deny it. They’re busy dealing with it. Firefighters are braving longer wildfire seasons, and states and federal governments have to figure out to budget for that. I had to sit in on a meeting with the Department of Interior and Agriculture and some of the rest of my team just to figure how we’re going to pay for more and more expensive fire seasons.
Farmers see crops wilted one year, washed away the next, and higher food prices get passed on to you, the American consumer.
Mountain communities worry about what smaller snow packs will mean for tourism, and then families at the bottom of the mountains wonder what it’ll mean for their drinking water.
Americans across the country are already paying the price of inaction — in insurance premiums, state and local taxes, and the costs of rebuilding and disaster relief.
So the question is not whether we need to act. The overwhelming judgment of science, of chemistry and physics and millions of measurements, has put all that to rest. Ninety-seven percent of scientists — including, by the way, some who originally disputed the data — have now put that to rest. They’ve acknowledged the planet is warming and human activity is contributing to it.
So the question now is whether we will have the courage to act before it’s too late.
And how we answer will have a profound impact on the world that we leave behind not just to you but to your children and to your grandchildren.
As a president, as a father and as an American, I am here to say we need to act. (Cheers, applause.) I — I refuse to condemn your generation and future generations to a planet that’s beyond fixing. And that’s why today I’m announcing a new national climate action plan, and I’m here to enlist your generation’s help in keeping the United States of America a leader, a global leader in the fight against climate change.
Now, this plan builds on progress that we’ve already made. You know, last year I took office — or — or the year that I took office, my administration pledged to reduce America’s greenhouse gas emissions by about 17 percent from their 2005 levels by the end of this decade. And we rolled up our sleeves, and we got to work. We doubled the electricity we generate from wind and the sun. We doubled the mileage our cars will get on a gallon of gas by the middle of the next decade. (Cheers, applause.)
Here at Georgetown I unveiled my strategy for a secure energy energy future. And thanks to the ingenuity of our businesses, we’re starting to produce much more of our own energy. We’re building the first nuclear power plants in more than three decades, in Georgia and South Carolina. For the first time in 18 years, America’s poised to produce more of our own oil than we buy from other nations. And today we produce more natural gas than anybody else.
So we’re producing energy. And these advances have grown our economy, have created new jobs that can’t be shipped overseas, and by the way, they’ve also helped drive our carbon pollution to its lowest levels in nearly 20 years. Since 2006, no country on Earth has reduced its total carbon pollution by as much as the United States of America. (Applause.) So it’s a good start.
But the reason we’re all here in the heat today is because we know we’ve got more to do. In my State of the Union address, I urged Congress to come up with a bipartisan market-based solution to climate change, like the one that Republican and Democratic senators worked on together a few years ago. And I still want to see that happen. I’m willing to work with anyone to make that happen.
But this is a challenge that does not pause for partisan gridlock. It demands our attention now. And this is my plan to meet it, a plan to cut carbon pollution, a plan to protect our country from the impacts of climate change, and a plan to lead the world in a coordinated assault on a changing climate. (Applause.)
This plan begins with cutting carbon pollution by changing the way we use energy, using less dirty energy, using more clean energy, wasting less energy throughout our economy.
And 43 years ago, Congress passed the law called the Clean Air Act of 1970.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah! (Applause.)
PRESIDENT OBAMA: That was a good law. The reasoning behind it was simple. New technology can protect our health by protecting the air we breathe from harmful pollution. And that law passed the Senate unanimously. Think about that. It passed the Senate unanimously. It passed the House of Representative 375 to 1. I don’t know who the one guy was. I haven’t looked that up. (Laughter.) I mean, you can barely get that many votes to name a post office, these days. (Laughter.) It was signed into law by a Republican president. It was later strengthened by another Republican president. This used to be a bipartisan issue.
Six years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gases are pollutants covered by that same Clean Air Act, and they required the Environmental Protection Agency, the EPA, to determine whether they’re a threat to our health and welfare. In 2009, the EPA determined that they are a threat to both our health and our welfare in many different ways, from dirtier air to more common heat waves, and therefore, subject to regulation.
Now, today, about 40 percent of America’s carbon pollution comes from our power plants.
But here’s the thing, right now, there are no federal limits to the amount of carbon pollution that those plants can pump into our air, none, zero. We limit the amount of toxic chemicals like mercury and sulfur and arsenic in our air or our water, but power plants can still dump unlimited amounts of carbon pollution into the air for free. That’s not right, that’s not safe and it needs to stop. (Cheers, applause.)
So today for the sake of our children and the health and safety of all Americans, I’m directing the Environmental Protection Agency to put an end to the limitless dumping of carbon pollution from our power plants and complete new pollution standards for both new and existing power plants. (Cheers, applause.)
I’m also directing the EPA to develop these standards in an open and transparent way, to provide flexibility to different states with different needs and build on the leadership that many states and cities and companies have already shown. In fact, many power companies have already begin modernizing their plants and creating new jobs in the process. Others have shifted to burning cleaner natural gas instead of dirtier fuel sources. Nearly a dozen states have already implemented or are implementing their own market-based programs to reduce carbon pollution.
More than 25 have set energy efficiency targets. More than 35 have set renewable energy targets. Over 1,000 mayors have signed agreements to cut carbon pollution. So the idea of setting higher pollution standards for our power plants is not new. It’s just time for Washington to catch up with the rest of the country. And that’s what we intend to do. (Applause.)
Now, what you will hear from the special interests and their allies in Congress is that this will kill jobs and crush the economy and basically end free enterprise as we know it. And the reason I know you’ll hear those things is because that’s what they’ve said every time America sets clear rules and better standards for our air and our water and our children’s health. And every time, they’ve been wrong.
For example, in 1970, when we decided, through the Clean Air Act, to do something about the smog that was choking our cities — and by the way, most young people here aren’t old enough to remember what it was like, but you know, when I was going to school in 1979, 1980 in Los Angeles, there were days where folks couldn’t go outside. And the sunsets were spectacular — (laughter) — because — because of all the pollution in the air. But at the time when we passed the Clean Air Act to try to get rid of some of this smog, some of the same doomsayers were saying, new pollution standards will decimate the auto industry. Guess what? Didn’t happen. Our air got cleaner.
In 1990, when we decided to do something about acid rain, they said our electricity bills would go up; the lights would go off; businesses around the country would suffer, I quote, “a quiet death.”
None of it happened, except we cut acid rain dramatically. The problem with all these tired excuses for inaction is that it’s a — (inaudible) — a fundamental lack of faith in American business and American ingenuity. (Applause.)
You know, these critics seem to think that when we ask our businesses to innovate and reduce pollution and lead, they can’t or they won’t do it. They’ll just kind of give up and quit. But in America, we know that’s not true. Look at our history. When we restricted cancer-causing chemicals in plastics and leaded fuel in our cars, it didn’t end the plastics industry or the oil industry. American chemists came up with better substitutes. When we phased out CFCs, the gases that were depleting the ozone layer, it didn’t kill off refrigerators or air conditioners or deodorant. (Laughter.)
American workers and businesses figured out how to do it better without harming the environment as much. The fuel standards that we put in place just a few years ago didn’t cripple automakers. The American auto industry retooled, and today, our automakers are selling the best cars in the world at a faster rate than they have in five years with more hybrid, more plug-in, more fuel-efficient cars for everybody to choose from. (Applause.)
So the point is, if you look at our history, don’t bet against American industry. Don’t bet against American workers, don’t tell folks that we have to choose between the health of our children or the health of our economy.
(Applause.) The old rules — the old rules may say we can’t protect our environment and promote economic growth at the same time, but in America, we’ve always used new technologies, we’ve used science, we’ve used research and development and discovery to make the old rules obsolete.
Today we use more clean energy, more renewables and natural gas, which is supporting hundreds of thousands of good jobs. We waste less energy, which saves you money at the pump and in your pocketbooks. And guess what. Our economy is 60 percent bigger than it was 20 years ago, while our carbon emissions are roughly back to where they were 20 years ago.
So obviously we can figure this out. It’s not an either/or; it’s a both/and. We’ve got to look after our children, we have to look after our future, and we have to grow the economy and create jobs. We can do all of that as long as we don’t fear the future; instead, we seize it. (Cheers, applause.)
And by the way, don’t take my word for it. You know, recently more than 500 businesses, including giants like GM and Nike, issued a climate declaration, calling action on climate change one of the greatest opportunities of the 21st century. Wal-Mart is working to cut its carbon pollution by 20 percent and transition completely to renewable energy.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Hear, hear ?). (Applause.)
PRESIDENT OBAMA: (Chuckles) Yeah, but Wal-Mart deserves a cheer for that. (Applause.) But think about it. Would the biggest company, the biggest retailer in America — would they really do that if it weren’t good for business, if it weren’t good for their shareholders?
A low-carbon clean energy economy can be an engine of growth for decades to come. And I want America to build that engine. I want America to build that future right here in the United States of America. That’s our task. (Cheers, applause.)
Now, one thing I want to make sure everybody understands. This does not mean that we’re going to suddenly stop producing fossil fuels. Our economy wouldn’t run very well if it did. And transitioning to a clean energy economy takes time. But when the doomsayers trot out the old warnings that these ambitions will somehow hurt our energy supply, just remind them that America produced more oil than we have in 15 years.
What is true is that we can’t just drill our way out of the energy and climate challenge that we face. (Cheers, applause.) That’s not possible. I’ve put forward in the past an all-of-the-above energy strategy, but our energy strategy must be about more than just producing more oil.
And by the way, it’s certainly got to be about more than just building one pipeline. Now — (applause) — I know there’s been, for example, a lot of controversy surrounding the proposal to build the pipeline, the Keystone pipeline that would carry oil from Canadian tar sands down to refineries in the Gulf. And the State Department is going through the final stages of evaluating the proposal. That’s how it’s always been done.
But I do want to be clear. Allowing the Keystone pipeline to be built requires finding that doing so would be in our nation’s interests.
And our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution. The net effects of the pipeline’s impact — (applause) — the net effects of the pipeline’s impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward. It’s relevant.
Now, even as we’re producing more domestic oil, we’re also producing more cleaner-burning natural gas than any other country on Earth. And again, sometimes there are disputes about natural gas, but let me say this: We should strengthen our position as the top natural gas producer because in the medium term, at least, it not only can provide safe, cheap power, but it can also help reduce our carbon emissions.
Federally supported technology has helped our businesses grow more effectively and extract more gas. And now we’ll keep working with the industry to make drilling safer and cleaner, to make sure that we’re not seeing methane emissions, and to put people to work modernizing our natural gas infrastructure so that we can power more homes and businesses with cleaner energy.
The bottom line is, natural gas is creating jobs. It’s lowering many families’ heat and power bills. And it’s the transition fuel that can power our economy with less carbon pollution even as our businesses work to develop and then deploy more of the technology required for the even cleaner energy economy of the future.
And that brings me to the second way that we’re going to reduce carbon pollution, by using more clean energy.
For the past four years, we’ve doubled the electricity that we generate from zero-carbon wind and solar power. (Cheers, applause.) And that means jobs, jobs manufacturing the wind turbines that now generate enough electricity to power nearly 15 million homes, jobs installing the solar panels that now generate more than four times the power at less cost than just a few years ago.
I know some Republicans in Washington dismiss these jobs, but those who do, need to call home, because 75 percent of all wind energy in this country is generated in Republican districts. (Cheers.) And that may explain why last year, Republican governors in Kansas and Oklahoma and Iowa — Iowa, by the way, a state that harnessed — harnesses almost 25 percent of its electricity from the wind — helped us in the fight to extend tax credits for wind energy manufacturers and producers. (Applause.)
Tens of thousands of good jobs were on the line, and those jobs were worth the fight. And countries like China and Germany are going all in in the race for clean — (audio break) — I believe Americans build things better than everybody else. I want America to win that race, but we can’t win it if we’re not in it. (Applause.)
So — so the — the plan I’m announcing today will help us double again our energy from wind and sun. Today, I’m directing the Interior Department to green-light enough private renewable energy capacity on public plans to power more than 6 million homes by 2020. (Cheers, applause.)
The Department of Defense, the biggest energy consumer in America, will install three gigawatts of renewable power on its bases, generating about the same amount of electricity each year as you’d get from burning 3 million tons of coal.
(Applause.)
And because billions of your tax dollars continue to still subsidize some of the most profitable corporations in the history of the world, my budget once again calls for Congress to end the tax breaks for big oil companies and invest in the clean energy companies that will fuel our future. (Cheers, applause.)
Now, the third way to reduce carbon pollution is to waste less energy in our cars, our homes, our businesses. The fuel standards we’ve set over the past few years — years mean that by the middle of the next decade, the cars and trucks we buy will go twice as far on a gallon of gas. That means you’ll have to fill up half as often. We’ll all reduce carbon pollution. And we’ve built on that success by setting the first-ever standards for heavy-duty trucks and buses and vans. And in the coming months we’ll partner with truck makers to do it again for the next generation of vehicles.
And meanwhile, the energy we use in our homes and our businesses and our factories, our schools, our hospitals — that’s responsible for about one-third of our greenhouse gases. The good news is simple upgrades don’t just cut that pollution; they put people to work, manufacturing and installing smarter lights and windows and sensors and appliances. And the savings show up in our electricity bills every month, forever. And that’s why we’ve set new energy standards for appliances like refrigerators and dishwashers.
And today our businesses are building better ones that will also cut carbon pollution and cut consumers’ electricity bills by hundreds of billions of dollars.
That means, by the way, that our federal government also has to lead by example. I’m proud that federal agencies have reduced their greenhouse gas emissions by more than 15 percent since I took office. But we can do even better than that. (Applause.) So today I’m setting a new goal. Your federal government will consume 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources within the next seven years. (Cheers, applause.) We are going to set that goal. We’ll also encourage private capital to get off the sidelines and get into these energy-saving investments. And by the end of the next decade, these combined efficiency standards for appliances and federal buildings will reduce carbon pollution by at least 3 billion tons. That’s an amount equal to what our entire energy sector emits in nearly half a year.
So I know these standards don’t sound all that sexy. But think of it this way. That’s the equivalent of planting 7.6 billion trees and letting them grow for 10 years, all while doing the dishes. It is a great deal, and we need to be doing it. (Applause.)
So using less dirty energy, transitioning to cleaner sources of energy, wasting less energy through our economy is where we need to go. And this plan will get us there faster. But I want to be honest. This will not get us there overnight. The hard truth is carbon pollution has built up in our atmosphere for decades now. And even if we Americans do our part, the planet will slowly keep warming for some time to come.
The seas will slowly keep rising and storms will get more severe, based on the science. It’s like tapping the brakes of a car before you come to a complete stop and then can shift into reverse; it’s going to take time for carbon emissions to stabilize. So in the meantime, we’re going to need to get prepared. And that’s why this plan will also protect critical sectors of our economy and prepare the United States for the impacts of climate change that we cannot avoid.
States and cities across the country are already taking it upon themselves to get ready. Miami Beach is hardening its water supply against seeping salt water. We’re partnering with the state of Florida to restore Florida’s natural clean water delivery system, the Everglades. The overwhelmingly Republican legislature in Texas voted to spend money on a new water development bank as long — as a long- running drought cost jobs and forced a town to truck in water from the outside.
New York City is fortifying its 520 miles of coastline as an insurance policy against more frequent and costly storms. And what we’ve learned from Hurricane Sandy and other disasters is that we’ve got to build smarter, more resilient infrastructure that can protect our homes and businesses and withstand more powerful storms. That means stronger seawalls, natural barriers, hardened power grids, hardened water systems, hardened fuel supplies.
So the budget I sent Congress includes funding to support communities that build these projects, and this plan directs federal agencies to make sure that any new project funded with taxpayer dollars is built to withstand increased flood risk. And we’ll partner with communities seeking to help to prepare for droughts and floods, reduce the risk of wildfires, protect the dunes and wetlands that pull double-duty as green space and as natural storm barriers.
And we’ll also open our climate data and NASA climate imagery to the public to make sure that cities and states assess risk under different climate scenarios, so that we don’t waste money building structures that don’t withstand the next storm.
So that’s what my administration will do to support the work already underway across America, not only to cut carbon pollution, but also to protect ourselves from climate change. But as I think everybody here understands, no nation can solve this challenge alone, not even one as powerful as ours. And that’s why the final part of our plan calls on America to lead, lead international efforts to combat a changing climate. (Applause.)
And make no mistake, the — the world still looks to America, believe me. You know, when I spoke to young people in Turkey a few years ago, the first question I got wasn’t about the challenges that part of the world faces, it was about the climate challenge that we all face and America’s role in addressing it.
And it was a fair question, because as the world’s largest economy and second-largest carbon emitter, as a country with unsurpassed ability to drive innovation and scientific breakthroughs, as a country that people around the world continue to look to in times of crisis, we’ve got a vital role to play. We can’t stand on the sidelines. We’ve got a unique responsibility and the steps that I’ve outlined today prove that we’re willing to meet that responsibility.
While all America’s carbon pollution fell last year, global carbon pollution rose to a record high.
That’s a problem. Developing countries are using more and more energy, and tens of millions of people entering a global middle class naturally want to buy cars and air conditioners of their own, just like us. You can’t blame them for that.
And when you have conversations with poor countries, they’ll say, well, you went through these stages of development. Why can’t we?
But what we also have to recognize is, these same countries are also more vulnerable to the effects of climate change than we are. They don’t just have as much to lose. They probably have more to lose. Developing nations with some of the fastest rising levels of carbon pollution are going to have to take action to meet this challenge alongside us. They’re watching what we do, but we’ve got to make sure that they’re stepping up to the plate as well. We’ll — we compete for business with them, but we also share a planet. And we have to all shoulder the responsibility for keeping the planet habitable, or we’re going to suffer the consequences together.
So to help more countries transitioning to cleaner sources of energy, and to help them do it faster, we’re going to partner with our private sector to apply private sector technological know-how in countries that transition to natural gas. We’ve mobilized billions of dollars in private capital for clean energy projects around the world.
Today I’m calling for an end of public financing for new coal plants overseas, unless they deploy carbon capture technologies, or there’s no other viable way for the poorest countries to generate electricity. (Applause.) And I urge other countries to join this effort. And I’m directing my administration to launch negotiations toward global free trade in environmental goods and services, including clean energy technology, to help more countries skip past the dirty phase of development and join a global, low-carbon economy.
They don’t have to repeat all the same mistakes that we’ve made. (Applause.)
We’ve also intensified our climate cooperation with major emerging economies like India and Brazil and China, the world’s largest emitter. So for example, earlier this month, President Xi of China and I reached an important agreement to jointly phase down our production and consumption of dangerous hydrofluorocarbons, and we intend to take more steps together in the months to come. It will make a difference; it’s a significant step in the reduction of carbon emissions. (Applause.)
And finally, my administration will redouble our efforts to engage our international partners in reaching a new global agreement to reduce carbon pollution through concrete action. (Applause.)
You know, four years ago, in Copenhagen, every major country agreed, for the first time, to limit carbon pollution by 2020. Two years ago, we decided to forge a new agreement beyond 2020 that would apply to all countries, not just developed countries. What we need is an agreement that’s ambitious, because that’s what the scale of the challenge demands. We need an inclusive agreement, because every country has to play its part. And we need an agreement that’s flexibile, because different nations have different needs. And if we can come together and get this right, we can define a sustainable future for your generation. So that’s my plan. (Applause.)
The actions I’ve announced today — the actions I’ve announced today should send a strong signal to the world that America intends to take bold action to reduce carbon pollution.
We will continue to lead by the power of our example, because that’s what the United States of America has always done.
I am convinced this is the fight America can and will lead in the 21st century, and I’m convinced this is a fight that America must lead. But it will require all of us to do our part. We’ll need scientists to design new fuels. And we’ll need farmers to grow new fuels. We’ll need engineers to devise new technologies. And we’ll need businesses to make and sell those technologies. We’ll need workers to operate assembly lines that hum with high-tech zero-carbon components, but we’ll also need builders to hammer into place the foundations for a — a new clean-energy era.
We’re going to need to give special care to people and communities that are unsettled by this transition, not just here in the United States but around the world. And those of us in positions of responsibility will need to be less concerned with the judgment of special interests and well-connected donors and more concerned with the judgment of posterity — (applause) — because you and your children and your children’s children will have to live with the consequences of our decisions.
As I said before, climate change has become a partisan issue, but it hasn’t always been. It wasn’t that long ago that Republicans led the way on new and innovative policies to tackle these issues. Richard Nixon opened the EPA. George H.W. Bush declared — first U.S. president to declare human activities are changing the atmosphere in unexpected and unprecedented ways. Someone who never shies away from a challenge, John McCain, introduced a market-based cap-and-trade bill to slow carbon pollution.
The woman that I’ve chosen to head up the EPA, Gina McCarthy, she’s worked — (cheers, applause) — she’s terrific. Gina’s worked for the EPA in my administration, but she’s also worked for five Republican governors. She’s got a long track record of working with industry and business leaders to forge common-sense solutions.
Unfortunately, she’s being held up in the Senate. She’s been held up for months, forced to jump through hoops no Cabinet nominee should ever have to, not because she lacks qualifications, because there are too many in the Republican Party right now who think that the Environmental Protecting Agency has no business protecting our environment from carbon pollution. The Senate should confirm her without any further obstruction or delay. (Cheers, applause.)
But more broadly, we’ve got to move beyond partisan politics on this issue.
I want to be clear. I am willing to work with anybody — Republicans, Democrats, independents, libertarians, greens, anybody — to combat this threat on behalf of our kids. I am open to all sorts of new ideas — maybe better ideas — to make sure that we deal with climate change in a way that promotes jobs and growth. Nobody has a monopoly on what is a very hard problem.
But I don’t have much patience for anyone who denies that this challenge is real. We don’t have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. (Cheers, applause.) Sticking your head in the sand might make you feel safer, but it’s not going to protect you from the coming storm. And ultimately, we will be judged as a people and as a society and as a country on where we go from here.
Our founders believed that those of us in positions of power are elected not just to serve as custodians of the present, but as caretakers of the future. And they charged us to make decisions with an eye on a longer horizon than the arc of our own political careers. That’s what the American people expect. That’s what they deserve. And someday our children and our children’s children will look at us in the eye and they’ll ask us, did we do all that we could, when we had the chance, to deal with this problem and leave them a cleaner, safer, more stable world? And I want to be able to say, yes, we did. Don’t you want that? (Cheers, applause.)
Americans are not a people who look backwards. We’re a people who look forward. We’re not a people who fear what the future holds; we shape it.
What we need in this fight are citizens who will stand up and speak up and compel us to do what this moment demands. Understand, this is not just a job for politicians. So I’m going to need all of you, to educate your classmates, your colleagues, your parents, your friends.
Tell them what’s at stake. Speak up at town halls, church groups, PTA meetings. Push back on misinformation. Speak up for the facts. Broaden the circle of those who are willing to stand up for our future. (Applause.)
Convince those in power to reduce our carbon pollution. (Applause.) Push your own communities to adopt smarter practices. (Applause.) Invest. Divest. Remind folks there’s no contradiction between a sound environment and strong economic growth.
And remind everyone who represents you at every level of government that sheltering future generations against the ravages of climate change is a prerequisite for your vote! Make yourself heard on this issue. (Cheers, applause.)
I understand the politics will be tough. The challenge we must accept will not reward us with a clear moment of victory. There’s no gathering army to defeat. There’s no peace treaty to sign. When President Kennedy said we’d go to the moon within the decade, we knew that we’d build a space ship and we’d meet the goal.
Our progress here will be measured differently, in crises averted, in a planet preserved. But can we imagine a more worthy goal? For while we may not live to sea the full realization of our ambition, we will have the satisfaction of knowing that the world we leave to our children will be — be better off for what we did.
It makes you realize, that astronaut said all those years ago, just what you have back there on Earth.
And that image in the photograph, that bright blue ball rising over the moon’s surface containing everything we hold dear, the laughter of children, a quiet sunset, all the hopes and dreams of posterity, that’s what’s at stake. That’s what we’re fighting for. And if we remember that, I’m absolutely sure we’ll succeed.
But thank you, and God bless you. God bless the United States of America. (Cheers, applause.)

Yeltsin File ボリス・エリツィン

Soviet Files: Three Days in August (RT Documentary)





2RR:3 Yeltsin File I

http://youtu.be/eCuYHBEeVSk

2RR:3 Yeltsin File II

http://youtu.be/AM3wXnTtPd4

2RR:3 Yeltsin File III

http://youtu.be/uZcdHFxRogk

2RR:3 Yeltsin File IV

http://youtu.be/j3_G5x0Uzlw

2RR:3 Yeltsin File V

http://youtu.be/8yR6G5WYUN8

========================================================

http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%9C%E3%83%AA%E3%82%B9%E3%83%BB%E3%82%A8%E3%83%AA%E3%83%84%E3%82%A3%E3%83%B3

ボリス・エリツィン

ボリス・ニコラエヴィチ・エリツィンロシア語: Борис Николаевич Ельцин バリース・ニカラーイェヴィチ・イェリツィンラテン文字表記: Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin1931年2月1日 - 2007年4月23日)は、ロシア連邦政治家で、同国の初代大統領(在任: 1991年 - 1999年)である。
大統領在任中にソ連8月クーデターに対する抵抗を呼びかけロシア連邦の民主化を主導した評価と共に、急速な市場経済移行に伴う市民生活の困窮、ロシアの国際的地位の低下、チェチェン紛争の泥沼化、強権・縁故政治への批判もあった

来歴・人物
スヴェルドロフスク州タリツァ地区英語版)ブトカ村生まれ。家系はウラル地方の独立農民。父は富農撲滅運動で無実の罪を着せられ収容所生活を送った。自伝によれば、エリツィンは共産主義をとったソビエト連邦時代において幼年期にロシア正教会でキリスト教の幼児洗礼を受けたという。第二次世界大戦中に武器庫から盗んだ手榴弾を分解している最中に、手榴弾が暴発し、左手の親指と人さし指が失われた。ベレズニキ(Berezniki)にあるプーシキン高校(Pushkin High School)を卒業。1955年にスヴェルドロフスク(現エカテリンブルク)にあるウラル工科大学建築科を卒業する。その後、1968年までスヴェルドロフスク州にある建設企業に勤めた。

ソ連共産党
1961年ソ連共産党に入党する。1968年に党の活動に専従し、1976年スヴェルドロフスク州第一書記に就任する。なお、1977年には党の指示によりニコライ2世一家殺害現場のイパチェフ館を取り壊している。スヴェルドロフスク州での働きぶりをレオニード・ブレジネフに評価され、1981年にソ連共産党中央委員となる。
ミハイル・ゴルバチョフの書記長就任後、1985年にソ連共産党政治局員候補兼中央委員会書記に就任。ブレジネフ派の大物であるヴィクトル・グリシンがモスクワ党第一書記を解任されると、1985年12月に後任のモスクワ党第一書記に就任した。
ゴルバチョフの下では改革派として行動したが、ゴルバチョフ政権におけるペレストロイカの遅れを強く非難したため、他の政治局員からのエリツィンに対する批判はゴルバチョフを驚かせるほど強いものとなる。1987年にブレジネフ派の大物エゴール・リガチョフを公然と非難したため、そのリガチョフと対立し、モスクワ市の党第一書記を解任された。さらに1988年2月には政治局員候補からも解任される。

ロシア共和国大統領
しかし、1989年3月の人民代議員大会選挙にモスクワ選挙区から出馬して当選し政界への復帰を果たす。この年民主綱領派のリーダーとなる。翌年の1990年5月にロシア共和国の最高会議議長(実質大統領)に就任。同年7月13日にはソ連共産党を離党した。1991年6月12日に行われたロシア共和国大統領選挙では57.3%の得票率を獲得して当選し、同年7月にロシア共和国大統領に就任。
同年8月にソ連副大統領ヤナーエフ を擁立する「保守派」が起こしたソ連8月クーデターの際には戦車の上からロシア国民に対しゼネストを呼びかけるなど徹底抗戦した。ゼネストは不徹底であったものの、軍と治安機関の大勢はクーデター派を支持せず、結果としてクーデターを失敗に終わらせた。
この事件の後、ゴルバチョフの求心力が低下し、代わってエリツィンの影響力が増大する。同年11月6日、エリツィンはソ連共産党系のロシア共産党が活動することを禁止した。12月8日、エリツィンはウクライナレオニード・クラフチュク大統領、ベラルーシスタニスラフ・シュシケビッチ最高会議議長と秘密会談を行い、ロシア・ウクライナ・ベラルーシのソ連からの離脱と独立国家共同体(CIS)の樹立を宣言することで合意した(ベロヴェーシ合意)。ソ連崩壊は避けられなくなり、12月25日にゴルバチョフはソ連大統領を辞任。ソビエト連邦はその歴史に幕を下ろした。
ロシア共和国大統領(任期5年)だったエリツィンはソ連崩壊後も引き続いてロシア連邦大統領としてロシアを主導した。
ソ連の事実上の後継国家であるロシアでは、アメリカとの関係改善が進み(連邦崩壊後も、ソ連時代の全ての核兵器をロシア共和国が所有することをウクライナやベラルーシに認めさせたのは、アメリカの助言によるところが大きい)、1993年には第二次戦略兵器削減条約(START II)に調印。
エリツィンはエゴール・ガイダルアナトリー・チュバイスに経済政策のイニシアティヴを取らせ、国際通貨基金(IMF)等の国際機関の助言に従い「ショック療法」と呼ばれる急激な市場主義経済導入を図った。しかしこの急激な市場経済への移行は経済に混乱をもたらすことになる。市場経済化への一環として行われた価格自由化は1992年に前年比2510%ものハイパーインフレを引き起こし、民衆の貯蓄・資産に打撃を与えて多くの民衆を貧困に追いやった。また1992年の国内総生産(GDP)は前年比マイナス14.5%となってしまった。エリツィンは同年6月にガイダルを首相代行に指名し、経済改革を推進しようとしたが、このような経済政策の失敗から人民代議員大会から信任を得られなかった。そのためエリツィンはガイダルを解任し、代わりにガスプロム社長のヴィクトル・チェルノムイルジンを首相に指名した。その後、チェルノムイルジンは議会の信任を得、首相に就任した。一方、バウチャー方式[1]による民営化も行われたが、これを上手く利用して国有資産だった企業を手に入れ、莫大な富を築き上げる者も出現した。彼らはロシアの新興財閥として政治的にも大きな影響力を及ぼしていくことになる。

また、その過程で発生したアレクサンドル・ルツコイ副大統領、ルスラン・ハズブラートフ最高会議議長ら議会との対立は1993年9月の議会による大統領解任劇に発展。これをみたエリツィンは最高会議と人民代議員大会を強制解体し、両者の対立は頂点に達した。翌10月には反大統領派がたてこもる最高会議ビルを戦車で砲撃し、議会側は降伏した(10月政変)。その後12月には大統領に強大な権限を与え、連邦会議国家会議から成る両院制議会、ロシア連邦議会にする事を定めた新しいロシア連邦憲法が制定された。西側の主要国はエリツィンを支持した。

その後、1994年デノミを行うなど経済の混乱が続き、またチェチェン侵攻が失敗した結果、エリツィンの支持率は低下した。さらにエリツィン自身、持病の心臓病の手術による過労がたたり、政権に不安定さが目立つようになる。
1995年の下院選挙ではロシア連邦共産党(ソ連崩壊後に再建)が第一党となるなど、エリツィン反対派が議会の多数を占めた。続く1996年の大統領選挙ではそのロシア連邦共産党のゲンナジー・ジュガーノフ議長に肉薄され、大苦戦。劣勢を逆転させたい一念でアメリカから選挙キャンペーンのプロを呼び、また、テレビカメラの前で若者に混じりダンスを披露した[2]。そしてジュガーノフ当選による共産主義の復活を恐れたボリス・ベレゾフスキーウラジーミル・グシンスキーなど新興財閥から巨額の選挙資金を捻出させ、新興財閥支配下のメディアにエリツィン支持のキャンペーンを張らせるなどしてなり振りかまわぬ選挙戦を展開した。その甲斐あってか第1回投票で得票率35.3%の1位につけ、ジュガーノフとの決選投票に持ち込んだ。決選投票の前には、第1回投票で3位につけたアレクサンドル・レベジ退役大将を安全保障会議書記に任命して取り込み、決選投票でエリツィンは53.8%を獲得し結果的に再選を果たした。
しかし大統領選において新興財閥の力に大きく頼ったために第二次エリツィン政権では新興財閥の影響力が増した。また、大統領選前の1995年に株式担保型民営化[3]が行われていたことで、新興財閥は結果として石油産業ほか多くの国営企業を手に入れ、国有資産を私物化するようになっていた。彼ら新興財閥は「オリガルヒ」と呼ばれ、二女のタチアナ・ディアチェンコらエリツィンの親族とともに「セミヤー」と呼ばれる側近集団を形成するようになる。このような「セミヤー」との癒着によりエリツィン政権は政治腐敗が蔓延していった。
 
1998年5月、経済復興を実現するには力不足だとして、チェルノムイルジン首相を解任した。同首相は、5年間にわたる長期首相だったが、一説によると病身の大統領に代わり副大統領然として振舞っていたこと、あるいは経済界との腐れ縁を大統領が嫌っての解任とも言われる。後任には35歳のセルゲイ・キリエンコ第一副首相兼燃料エネルギー相が就任したが、8月17日ロシア財政危機が発生。短期国債の取引を停止し、事実上の債務超過に陥った。就任直後の出来事だったが、責任をとらされ、解任された。
キリエンコに替わって首相に任命されたのは諜報機関KGB出身のエフゲニー・プリマコフであった。プリマコフは、ゴルバチョフ時代にソ連共産党政治局員候補で、ソ連崩壊後のロシアで対外情報庁(SVR)長官や外相を歴任した実力者であった。やわな若手改革派ではこの危機を乗りきれないと考えられたのであろう。プリマコフ首相は、大統領よりも、議会重視のスタンスを打ち出し、共産党からも閣僚を一本釣りの形で起用し、議会の支持に依拠する珍しい内閣であった。ロシアは金融危機を乗り切るため、IMFに支援を要請、金融危機を沈静化させた。また、エリツィン大統領周辺の「セミヤー」「オリガルヒ」と呼ばれる側近グループの排除に乗り出し、ユーリ・スクラトフ検事総長に命じて汚職摘発を開始した。これによってプリマコフ首相の支持率は上昇したが、一方これに危機感を抱いた大統領によって1999年5月に解任された。
さらに後任のセルゲイ・ステパーシン首相も僅か3ヶ月で解職し、1999年8月にロシア連邦保安庁長官のウラジーミル・プーチンに首相を交代した。このように首相を短期間で次々に挿げ替え、自らの権力を維持するためになりふり構わぬようにも見える行動を繰り返すなど政権はレームダックの様相を呈し始めた。

1999年12月31日正午にテレビ演説を行い、電撃辞任を表明。後継の大統領として、当時首相だったプーチンを指名した。辞任演説では、国民の期待に応えられなかったことの許しを乞いたいと述べ、新しい時代のロシアには新しい指導者が求められていると語った。
その後表舞台からは姿を消し、悠々自適の年金生活を送ったという[4]。プーチン政権については、2004年ベスラン学校占拠事件発生後に知事を大統領による任命制に改めたことに対しては批判をする一方、2006年2月にプーチンはロシアにとって正しい選択だったと賞賛している。同年6月3日パリで開催されていた全仏オープン7日目を夫妻で観戦し、シャラポワから帽子にサインしてもらう姿が撮られている。これが最後の公の姿となった。
2007年4月23日、長年の心臓疾患による多臓器不全(一部報道では心血管不全症とも)によりモスクワの病院で死去。76歳だった。4月25日救世主ハリストス大聖堂にて国葬が行われ、プーチンはこの日を「国民服喪の日」とすることを宣言した。葬儀にはプーチン、ジョージ・H・W・ブッシュビル・クリントンらが参列した。なお、日本からは要人が派遣できなかった[5]。葬儀後、遺体はノヴォデヴィチ修道院の墓地に埋葬された。

著書
『告白』(草思社、1990年)
『エリツィンの手記――崩壊・対決の舞台裏〈上・下〉』(同朋舎出版、1994年)
『ボリス・エリツィン最後の証言』(NCコミュニケーションズ、2004年)

外部リンク
CNN Cold War - Profile: Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin
Boris Yeltsin the Elvis Fan

最終更新 2014年1月27日