Overblog Suivre ce blog
Administration Créer mon blog
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 16:19

http://carfree.free.fr/index.php/2009/10/30/auto-electrique-insuffisant-changer-de-schema-socio-economique-sera-indispensable/


Auto électrique ? Insuffisant ! Changer de schéma socio-économique sera indispensable

 

Face à la nécessité de diminuer considérablement nos émissions de gaz à effet de serre la nouvelle solution supposée nous tirer d’affaire serait, selon certains, une marche forcée vers l’électrification du parc automobile.



Plus généralement de nombreuses personnes semblent croire que les progrès scientifiques et techniques dans divers domaines seront capables de nous donner les moyens de conserver nos diverses façons de vivre (ceci pour les pays les plus favorisés) et de permettre aux autres pays de rejoindre petit à petit le niveau de confort que nous connaissons en se basant sur le schéma qui est aujourd’hui en vigueur chez nous.



L’équation semble assez communément admise : progrès = confort pour tous + réduction des émissions de GES + croissance économique assurée sur le long terme +…

Cela pour ceux qui admettent l’origine anthropique du réchauffement du climat, car il en est qui contestent ce point de vue et même éprouvent de grandes difficultés à admettre ce réchauffement.

On le constate sur un certain nombre de blogs, ces personnes avancent divers arguments, depuis des tentatives d’interprétation des données disponibles différentes de celles présentées par les scientifiques du GIEC (on lira avec profit un article intéressant à propos d’une controverse sur l’interprétation des données dendrochronologiques : Hey Ya! (mal) ) à une sorte de complot de scientifiques et de politiques qui défendraient des intérêts non identifiés… ou la simple cupidité d’une clique de scientifiques qui aurait « monté l’affaire du réchauffement et du CO2 » dans le seul objectif d’attirer des crédits plus conséquents vers leurs laboratoires…

Il faudrait que ces gens nous présentent un peu plus que leurs interprétations hâtives portant généralement sur quelque courbes à la validité plus ou moins reconnue, bricolages qu’ils se croient autorisés à confronter au travail de quelques milliers de spécialistes afin d’en « démontrer » l’invalidité pour nous convaincre.

Encore que, même s’ils parvenaient à nous prouver de façon décisive que le réchauffement actuel ou bien n’existe pas ou qu’il n’est pas imputable aux activités humaines (combustion de ressources fossiles), ils ne seraient pas plus tirés d’affaire que nous ne le serions, car il nous faudrait quand même résoudre 2 problèmes majeurs liés à notre gourmandise énergétique.

Le premier est la diminution des ressources en hydrocarbures facilement utilisables, et donc à bas coût, en confrontation avec la demande de plus en plus forte de sources d’énergie de ce type, le second qui est une des conséquences de notre fringale et pourrait devenir dramatique si nous ne réduisons pas fortement notre consommation : l’acidification galopante des océans (10% de l’océan Arctique sera corrosif pour la vie marine avant dix ans Arctic seas turn to acid, putting vital food chain at risk).

Quel que soit l’horizon vers lequel nous nous tournons nous subodorons cette nécessité de faire appel à des énergies alternatives et voulons croire que la part grandissante qu’elles prendront dans nos vies, en conjonction avec des progrès réalisés dans leur mise en oeuvre, suffira à nous redonner un élan sur la lancée qui est la nôtre depuis plus d’un siècle.

En d’autres termes on change seulement quelques outils et l’on continue « comme avant » avec les mêmes avantages, les mêmes possibilités, les mêmes degrés de liberté…

Il me semble depuis assez longtemps qu’une évolution linéaire de nos sociétés sur le modèle de la seconde moitié du XX éme siècle, au détail des source d’énergie près, n’est pas envisageable et qu’il faudra aller beaucoup plus loin que de « simples » substitutions énergétiques si nous voulons conserver une biosphère vivable pour tous.

Passons sous silence le fait que tous les pays du monde n’ont pas connu nos « trente glorieuses » ni notre développement accéléré, en Europe de l’Ouest par exemple, depuis les années 1950 : l’évolution du niveau de confort n’a pas été la même pour tous et l’on meurt massivement de faim avec beaucoup de constance dans tant de régions du monde depuis des décennies…

L’idée, qui n’est pas nouvelle, que les progrès des sciences et des techniques amènera santé et prospérité pour tous doit être oubliée, ou plutôt reformulée de cette façon : il dépendra de ceux qui détiennent les moyens d’aider ou non ceux qui en sont dépourvus que ces derniers parviennent un jour à un niveau de confort acceptable, ce qui d’une certaine façon place dans les plateaux de la balance la cupidité face à l’équité…

Pas plus qu’on ne peut faire confiance à une mécanique « du marché » on ne peut espérer d’une mécanique « du progrès » : seule l’action et la décision des hommes peut changer, ou non, un état de fait que l’on déplore.

Action et décision : c’est notre volonté qui est impliquée de façon très directe, et les moyens que nous mettrons dans l’exécution de nos décisions les conduiront ou non au succès.

Pour parvenir à ce succès il faudra au moins une condition supplémentaire, inévitable : que nos décisions reposent sur une analyse pertinente des questions à résoudre.

En ce qui concerne la faim dans le monde soit nos analyses ont manqué de pertinence soit nos décisions n’ont pas atteint le seuil requis par les analyses et les effets que ces dernières étaient supposées produire ne se sont donc pas manifestés.

On peut pourtant considérer que cette question de la faim dans le monde (et plus généralement celle d’une développement harmonieux ou équilibré) est un enjeu de très haut niveau, comme l’est aujourd’hui celui qui porte sur les énergies que nous utilisons.

Croire qu’il suffira de fermer le robinet, d’éteindre la lumière en quittant une pièce (et qu’une somme des gestes individuels de cet ordre) peut suppléer à l’absence d’une analyse plus profonde (suivie des décisions appropriée) et mener à la résolution des problèmes d’eau et d’énergie dans le monde m’apparaîtra toujours comme une absurdité : ces gestes ont une utilité matérielle réelle mais fort limitée, une utilité psychologique peut-être un peu plus importante selon la façon dont on les envisage.

Soit on considère qu’ils sont « un pas vers » mais qu’il en faudra d’autres (à définir, mais on y pense réellement) et cela peut ouvrir vers d’autres perspectives soit on pense avoir « fait son devoir, ce que l’on peut faire », le nécessaire et le suffisant, et l’on se trompe.

Dans le domaine de notre mobilité et de la voiture électrique tentons donc d’examiner ce qui serait nécessaire et suffisant.

Cet examen ne peut se faire sur un coin de table : il requiert de savoir avec assez de précision ce qu’est aujourd’hui le panorama de notre mobilité, et plus généralement des transports dans le monde car il faut considérer cette question au niveau mondial dans notre « monde mondialisé », puis mettre en regard le véhicule individuel et les divers autres moyens de transport, pour connaître la part actuelle de chacun, les évolutions qui pourraient se manifester et leurs impacts sur nos ressources énergétiques actuelles et à venir autant que sur nos capacités à nous déplacer.

Bien entendu je ne vous dresserai pas ce synoptique en quelques lignes car il existe, il vient d’être publié par l’Agence Française de Développement (AFD), en voici la présentation : « Les transports face aux défis de l’énergie et du climat » (texte intégral téléchargeable sur cette page).

Je conseille à chacun de visiter cette page pour au moins prendre connaissance du sommaire du document, qui montre qu’il ne s’agit pas d’un survol superficiel mais plutôt d’une étude fouillée, de lecture très agréable par ailleurs, dans laquelle de nombreux facteurs ont été pris en compte.

Le mieux sera évidemment de lire l’intégralité du document.

En ce qui concerne la voiture électrique : « La combinaison de l’ensemble des progrès techniques
décrits pourrait au mieux se traduire, à l’horizon de 35 à 40 ans, par une consommation équivalente moyenne mondiale de l’ordre de trois litres aux 100 km (véhicules d’entrée de gamme), contre un peu plus de cinq aujourd’hui, et par une réduction des émissions spécifiques de CO2 d’un facteur 2 au grand maximum. Ces résultats – loin d’être négligeables – attirent néanmoins plusieurs commentaires. ».

On voit qu’il ne faut pas attendre un remplacement plus ou moins instantané du parc thermique par de l’électrique et qu’à l’échéance de 30/40 ans on n’annulera pas les émissions de CO2 spécifiques au véhicule individuel : elles seront seulement significativement réduites.

Par ailleurs la question de l’utilisation des divers « progrès » est nettement posée, que le véhicule soit électrique ou thermique : « Actuellement, les constructeurs utilisent les technologies pour « offrir » des « nouveaux services » de confort, de sécurité, d’espace et des « pseudo » performances (puissance maxi du moteur, vitesse maxi), qui ne seront jamais utilisées par le client mais qui intègrent une forte valeur marchande. … Tant que l’efficacité énergétique n’aura pas une valeur marchande suffisante, le gain énergétique observable par le client sera réduit. ».

En d’autres termes le souci des constructeurs, puisque cela correspond à une « demande » potentielle de ses futurs clients, est d’utiliser prioritairement les avancées technologiques pour améliorer des aspects cosmétiques plutôt que réellement fonctionnels, et notamment celui d’une véritable sobriété énergétique.

Plus loin le document envisage une « scission entre des véhicules « fournisseurs » d’émotions et d’autres « fournisseurs » de simples services de mobilité » et imagine « de nouveaux services de mobilité dont la plupart sont à inventer. ».

Mais cela suffira-t-il à ce que le monde puisse trouver un semblant d’équilibre ?

Probablement pas car nous sommes profondément contraints par nos infrastructures, celles des transports, de l’habitat, de la distribution entre les zones d’habitat et zones d’activités, très contraints aussi par la structure de nos réseaux économiques et de production dont on peut fortement se demander s’ils resteront longtemps compatibles avec les quantités d’énergie dont nous disposerons pour chaque usage, en cohérence avec la nécessité (qu’elle soit destinée à stopper le réchauffement global ou l’acidification des eaux océaniques !) de réduire nos émissions de gaz à effet de serre.

Le document plaide, non sans arguments, « Pour une relocalisation écologique et sociale » appuyée sur 3 piliers : « l’arrêt de la dévalorisation généralisée du travail humain. … le droit des peuples à la souveraineté alimentaire et à une alimentation saine. … la lutte contre les destructions environnementales ».

Changer de schéma socio-économique sera probablement indispensable…

Cette étude est suivie d’une intéressante section « Expériences et témoignages » qui nous démontre, s’il fallait le faire, que nous ne pouvons nous contenter de la promotion d’un véhicule économe ou électrique pour résoudre les gros problèmes énergétiques, climatiques, de société et de biodiversité qui nous attendent bientôt et pourront se manifester avec une certaine férocité.

Pour se changer les idées on pourra lire « La décroissance : idées fortes, terme ambigu », car aujourd’hui la véritable question est probablement « comment réorienter, et avec quels effets sur nos vies »…

Source: http://activart.com/intelliblug/index.php/

Partager cet article:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Scoopeo
  • Technorati
  • Wikio
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis

Articles relatifs


 

3 Commentaires, Commentaire ou Rétrolien

  1. Philippe Schwoerer

    Greenworld, je ne peux qu’adhérer à cet article dont l’avantage est de poser les différents problèmes bien actuels de la consommation et de la place des pays les plus riches par rapport aux plus pauvres.

    Lorsque j’ai choisi de me mettre en route pour la planète en pensant à l’avenir de mes enfants, je savais que le chemin n’aurait pas de fin et qu’il serait dès lors impossible de se reposer sur ses lauriers.

    Il se trouve que, parmi mes choix, je me suis retrouvé avec un véhicule électrique dans le garage. Ce qui m’a amené à me poser la question du nucléaire. J’ai alors quitté EDF pour Enercoop non sans avoir demandé au préalable l’avis de la coopérative.

    J’ai conscience que ce choix correspond à mon cas familial et personnel, que finalement je m’en sors bien. Pas de transports en commun en rapport avec nos trajet et nos horaires, distances trop lointaines pour envisager le vélo au quotidien, difficile de changer de lieu de résidence, etc.

    Dans les différentes communautés dédiées aux utilisateurs de véhicules électriques, je constate qu’un nombre croissant d’entre-eux ont pris conscience que le VE n’est pas une solution de masse et d’avenir, pour différentes raisons. Aujourd’hui, rares sont ceux qui parlent encore de pollution zéro. Pourquoi ? Tout simplement parce que les utilisateurs des VE aujourd’hui sur les routes, ont fait un jour un choix écologique qui leur a paru satisfaisait et qui donnait suite à un chemin intérieur qui les mènent à réfléchir toujours plus loin (Carfree est une aide d’ailleurs à ce sujet). Plusieurs ont aussi fait le choix d’Enercoop, d’autres ont laissé la voiture thermique pour un scooter électrique, voire un VAE. Ceux-là, dont je fais partie, ne peuvent s’arrêter et se dire, ça y est, j’ai ma conscience pour moi. Obligatoirement, on se pose la question de la valeur de nos choix individuels par rapport au monde.

    Les actuels utilisateurs de VE ne sont pas une menace, mais plutôt des gens en marche, qui font s’interroger.

    En revanche, j’ai bien peur que ce ne soit pas le cas des futurs acquéreurs de VE qui y viendront par soucis d’économie, de snobisme, de bonne conscience immédiate sans voir plus loin… et qui ne remettront pas en cause leurs gestes au quotidien, n’auront ni le souci ni le désir de faire toujours plus pour la planète, continueront à penser individuel plutôt que collectif. Le nucléaire, la pollution par la production, l’espace en ville ne seront pas leurs soucis.

    Pour cela et différentes autres raisons, je pense que la voiture électrique ne sera pas bonne à être mise entre toutes les mains… en tout cas pas entre les mains de ceux qui espérent continuer à dominer les autoroutes (comme c’est déjà possible avec une Tesla ou une Fisker Karma) et la nature.

    J’avais espéré que la voiture électrique serait l’occasion de se libérer du nucléaire par prise de conscience, de dessiner un autre monde ensemble dans un imaginaire collectif fervent qui redistribuerait les cartes de l’habitat et du travail, qu’un dialogue s’instaurerait qui ferait quitter son égo au plus grand nombre.

    Hélas, je pense qu’il n’en sera rien. Il n’est qu’à voir les questions et l’enthousiasme soulevé autour des sportives électriques. C’est toujours les mêmes mots : puissance, vitesse, distance, plaisir de conduire, confort.

    La transformation n’aura pas lieu, car seuls quelques-uns sont aujourd’hui capable de vraiment bouger. Beaucoup mènent leur vie comme une sorte de suicide à tout petit feu : du plaisir tout de suite car bientôt je serai mort… de quoi, je ne sais pas, mais je sais que je serai mort. Avec de telles pensées, pourquoi modifier ses habitudes. La crise, une mauvaise météo, des parents et amis qui s’éloignent, la pollution, le stress au travail… et l’on tombre dans une sorte de dépression qui rime avec ‘Après moi le déluge’ ou ‘J’ai déjà assez de mal à vivre, fichez-moi la paix’.

    Beaucoup pense que la voiture électrique ne se généralisera pas. Je n’en suis pas si sûr. Car elle va dépasser le véhicule thermique sur les terrains de la vitesse et de la puissance.

    La voiture électrique ne peut pas être écologique à grande échelle, sauf à la contraindre à une utilisation communautaire, sauf à lui adjoindre un plan de bonne conduite qui impose un souci extrême de l’autre et de l’avenir de la planète (bridage de la vitesse, multipropriété, tarif de l’électricité revu à la hausse pour son usage…).

  2. MDR, la France manquera d’électricité cet hiver! Selon RTE, Il va donc falloir recourir à des importations et peut-être même à des coupures.
    Heureusement que le parc automobile n’est pas encore massivement électrifié…
    http://www.radiobfm.com/edito/home/48160/la-france-manquera-delectricite-cet-hiver/

  3. Philippe Schwoerer

    Au moins les coupures pourront-elles rappeler que l’énergie électrique disponible n’est pas infinie. De qui faire réfléchir…

Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 16:13

Tower Of London, London, England 
http://johnsmilitaryhistory.com/tower.html
Her Majesty's Royal Palace and Fortress, more commonly known as the Tower of London (and historically as The Tower), is a historic fortress and scheduled monument in central London, England, on the north bank of the River Thames. It is located within the London Borough of Tower Hamlets and is separated from the eastern edge of the City of London by the open space known as Tower Hill. It is the oldest building used by the British government.[1]
The Tower of London is often identified with the White Tower, the original stark square fortress built by William the Conqueror[1] in 1078. However, the tower as a whole is a complex of several buildings set within two concentric rings of defensive walls and a moat.
The tower's primary function was a fortress, a royal palace, and a prison (particularly for high status and royal prisoners, such as the Princes in the Tower and the future Queen Elizabeth I). This last use has led to the phrase "sent to the Tower" (meaning "imprisoned"). It has also served as a place of execution and torture, an armoury, a treasury, a zoo, the Royal Mint, a public records office, an observatory, and since 1303, the home of the Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom.

The Tower is located in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, at the eastern boundary of the City of London financial district, adjacent to the River Thames and Tower Bridge. Between the river and the Tower is Tower Wharf, a freely accessible walkway with views of the river, tower and bridge, together with HMS Belfast and London City Hall on the opposite bank.
The nearest London Underground station is Tower Hill on the Circle and District Lines. The nearest Docklands Light Railway station is Tower Gateway. London Fenchurch Street is a nearby National Rail station. River cruise boats stop at the Tower Millennium Pier and Thames Clipper services at St. Katharine Pier.

The White Tower and courtyard
At the centre of the Tower of London stands the Norman White Tower built in 1078 by William the Conqueror (reigned 1066-87) inside the southeast angle of the city walls, adjacent to the Thames.[2] This was as much to protect the Normans from the people of the City of London as to protect London from outside invaders. William appointed Gundulf, Bishop of Rochester, as the architect. Fine Caen stone, imported from France, was used for the corners of the building and as door and window dressings, though Kentish ragstone was used for the bulk of the edifice.[3] According to legend the mortar used in its construction was tempered by the blood of beasts. Another legend ascribed the Tower not to William but to the Romans. William Shakespeare in his play Richard III stated that it was built by Julius Caesar.
The White Tower is 90 feet (27 m) high and the walls vary from 15 feet (4.5 m) thick at the base to almost 11 feet (3.3 m) in the upper parts. Above the battlements rise four turrets; three of them are square, but the one on the northeast is circular, in order to accommodate a spiral staircase. This turret was briefly used as the first royal observatory in the reign of Charles II. Completing the defences to the south of the Tower was the bailey.
In the 1190s, King Richard the Lionheart (reigned 1189-99) enclosed the White Tower with a curtain wall, and had a moat dug around it filled with water from the Thames. Richard utilised the pre-existing Roman city wall, to the east, as part of the circuit.[4] Part of the wall he built was incorporated into the later circuit wall of Henry III and is still extant, running between the Bloody Tower and the Bell Tower, the latter of which also dates to his reign.[5] In 1240 Henry III had the exterior of the building whitewashed, which is how it got its name.
The Inmost Ward
In the early thirteenth century Henry III (reigned 1216-72) transformed the Tower into a major royal residence and had palatial buildings constructed within the Inner Bailey to the south of the White Tower. This Inmost Ward was entered by the now ruined Coldharbour Gate to the NW and bounded by a wall, fortified by the Wakefield Tower to the SW, the Lanthorn Tower to the SE, and the now ruined Wardrobe Tower to the NE.[6] The well appointed Wakefield Tower and the Lanthorn Tower were integral parts of this new royal palace, and adjoined the now demolished Great Hall situated between them.[7] The Tower remained a royal residence until the time of Oliver Cromwell, who demolished some of the old palatial buildings.
The Inmost Ward
In the early thirteenth century Henry III (reigned 1216-72) transformed the Tower into a major royal residence and had palatial buildings constructed within the Inner Bailey to the south of the White Tower. This Inmost Ward was entered by the now ruined Coldharbour Gate to the NW and bounded by a wall, fortified by the Wakefield Tower to the SW, the Lanthorn Tower to the SE, and the now ruined Wardrobe Tower to the NE.[6] The well appointed Wakefield Tower and the Lanthorn Tower were integral parts of this new royal palace, and adjoined the now demolished Great Hall situated between them.[7] The Tower remained a royal residence until the time of Oliver Cromwell, who demolished some of the old palatial buildings.
The Outer Ward
Between 1275 and 1285 Edward I (reigned 1272-1307) built an outer curtain wall, completely enclosing the inner wall and thus creating a concentric double defence. He filled in the moat and built a new moat around the new outer wall. The space between the walls is called the Outer Ward. The wall has five towers facing the river:
•Byward Tower
•St Thomas's Tower, built between 1275-1279 by Edward I to provide additional royal accommodation for the King.
•Cradle Tower
•Well Tower
•Develin Tower
On the north face of the outer wall are three semicircular bastions, the Brass Mount, the North Bastion and Legge's Mount.
The water entrance to the Tower is often referred to as Traitor's Gate because prisoners accused of treason such as Queen Anne Boleyn and Sir Thomas More are said to have passed through it. Traitor's Gate cuts through St Thomas's Tower and replaced Henry III's watergate in the Bloody Tower behind it. Behind Traitors Gate in the pool was an engine used to raise water to a cistern located on the roof of the White Tower. The engine was originally powered by the force of the tide or by horsepower and eventually by steampower; this was adapted around 1724 to drive machinery for boring gun barrels. It was removed in the 1860s. The Tudor Timber Framing seen above the great arch of Traitor's Gate dates from 1532 and was restored in the 19th century.
The western entrance and moat
The Middle Tower (centre) guards the outer perimeter entrance across the (now) dry moat
A ditch or moat, now dry, encircles the whole, crossed at the southwestern angle by a stone bridge, leading to the Byward Tower from the Middle Tower — a gateway which had formerly an outwork, called the Lion Tower.
The Tower today is principally a tourist attraction. Besides the buildings themselves, the British Crown Jewels, an armour collection from the Royal Armouries, and a remnant of the wall of the Roman fortress are on display.
The tower is manned by the Yeomen Warders (known as Beefeaters), who act as tour guides, provide security, and are a tourist attraction in their own right. Every evening, the warders participate in the Ceremony of the Keys as the Tower is secured for the night. All warders have residence within the Tower, and must also own a residence outside of the Tower, so, that upon their retirement, they may return to a home outside of the Tower.
A Royal Menagerie was established at the tower in the 13th century, possibly as early as 1204 during the reign of King John, and probably stocked with animals from an earlier menagerie started in 1125 by Henry I at his palace in Woodstock, near Oxford; William of Malmesbury reported that Henry had lions, leopards, lynxes and camels among other animals there.[11] Its year of origin is often stated as 1235, when Henry III received a wedding gift of three leopards (so recorded, although they may have been lions) from Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor. In 1264, they were moved to the Bulwark, which was duly renamed the Lion Tower, near the main western entrance. It was opened as an occasional public spectacle in the reign of Elizabeth I. A lion skull was radiocarbon dated to between 1280 and 1385, making it the earliest medieval big cat known in Britain.[12]
The menagerie was open to the public by the 18th century; admission was a sum of three half-pence or the supply of a cat or dog for feeding to the lions.[13] This was where William Blake saw the tiger which may have inspired his poem The Tyger. The menagerie's last director, Alfred Cops, who took over in 1822, found the collection in a dismal state but restocked it and issued an illustrated scientific catalogue. Partly for commercial reasons and partly for animal welfare, the animals were moved to the Zoological Society of London's London Zoo when it opened. The last of the animals left in 1835, and most of the Lion Tower was demolished soon after, although Lion Gate remains.
The Tower of London housed a polar bear in 1252, which was a gift from the King of Norway.[14]
It had been thought that there have been at least six ravens in residence at the tower for centuries. It was said that Charles II ordered their removal following complaints from John Flamsteed, the Royal Astronomer.[15] However, they were not removed because Charles was then told of the legend that if the ravens ever leave the Tower of London, the White Tower, the monarchy, and the entire kingdom would fall (the London Stone has a similar legend). Charles, following the time of the English Civil War, superstition or not, was not prepared to take the chance, and instead had the observatory moved to Greenwich.
The earliest known reference to a tower raven is a picture in the newspaper The Pictorial World in 1885.[16] This and scattered subsequent references to the tower ravens, both literary and visual, which appear in the late nineteenth to early twentieth century place them near the monument commemorating those beheaded at the tower, popularly known as the “scaffold.” This strongly suggests that the ravens, which are notorious for gathering at gallows, were originally used to dramatize tales of imprisonment and execution at the tower told by the Yeomen Warders to tourists.[17] There is evidence that the original ravens were donated to the tower by the Earls of Dunraven,[18] perhaps because of their association with the Celtic raven-god Bran.[19] However wild ravens, which were once abundant in London and often seen around meat markets (such as nearby Eastcheap) feasting for scraps, could have roosted at the tower in earlier times.[20]
During the Second World War most of the Tower's ravens perished through shock during bombing raids, leaving a sole survivor named 'Grip'.[20] There is evidence that the ravens were used as unofficial spotters for enemy planes and bombs during the Blitz.[21] Before the tower reopened to the public on 1 January 1946, care was taken to ensure that a new set of ravens was in place.[22]
The ravens' wings are clipped to prevent them from flying away, though they are free to roam the tower grounds, and they are cared for by the Ravenmaster, a duty given to one of the Yeomen Warders. The ravens' names/gender/age are (as of June 2009):[23]
•Gwylum (male, 18 years old)
•Thor (male, 15 years old)
•Hugin (female, 11 years old)
•Munin (female, 11 years old)
•Branwen (female, 3 years old)
•Bran (male, 3 years old)
•Gundulf (male, 1 year old)
•Baldrick (male, 1 year old)
•Fleur (female, 4 years old)
•Colin (male, 2 years old)
The oldest raven ever to serve at the Tower of London was called Jim Crow, who died at the age of 44.[24]
In 2006, ahead of the H5N1 avian influenza scare, the ravens were moved indoors; as of June 2006, they are once again free to roam about the grounds within the tower complex.
The first prisoner was Ranulf Flambard in 1100 who, as Bishop of Durham, was found guilty of extortion. He had been responsible for various improvements to the design of the tower after the first architect Gundulf moved back to Rochester. He escaped from the White Tower by climbing down a rope, which had been smuggled into his cell in a wine casket.
Other prisoners include:
•Gruffydd ap Llywelyn Fawr (c. 1200 – 1 March, 1244) a Welsh prince, the eldest but illegitimate son of Llywelyn the Great ("Llywelyn Fawr"). He fell to his death whilst trying to escape from a cell in the Tower.
•John Balliol King of Scotland - after being forced to abdicate the crown of Scotland by Edward I he was imprisoned in the Tower from 1296 to 1299.
•David II King of Scotland
•John II King of France
•Henry Laurens, the third President of the Continental Congress of Colonial America.
•Domhnáill Ballaugh Ó Catháin, the last chieftain of Clan Ó Catháin died in the Tower in 1626.
•Charles I de Valois, Duke of Orléans was one of the many French noblemen wounded in the Battle of Agincourt on 25 October, 1415. Captured and taken to England as a hostage, he remained in captivity for twenty-five years, at various places including Wallingford Castle. Charles is remembered as an accomplished poet owing to the more than five hundred extant poems he produced, most written while a prisoner.
•Henry VI of England was imprisoned in the Tower, where he was murdered on 21 May 1471. Each year on the anniversary of Henry VI's death, the Provosts of Eton College and King's College, Cambridge, lay roses and lilies on the altar that stands where he died.
•Margaret of Anjou, consort of Henry VI.
•George Plantagenet, 1st Duke of Clarence, brother of King Edward IV of England.
•Edward V of England and his brother Richard of Shrewsbury, also known as the Princes in the Tower, popular legend states that their uncle, Richard Duke of Glouchester locked them in the tower for their own protection, then, later, ordered their deaths.
•Sir William de la Pole. A distant relative of King Henry VIII, he was incarcerated at the Tower for 37 years (1502-1539) for allegedly plotting against Henry VII, thus becoming the longest-held prisoner.
•Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset, and his steward Sir John Thynne.
•Thomas More was imprisoned on 17 April 1535. He was executed on 6 July 1535 and his body was buried at the Tower of London.
•Anne Boleyn, Queen of England, imprisoned on 2 May 1536 on charges of adultery, treason, and incest.
•The future Queen Elizabeth I, imprisoned for two months in 1554 for her alleged involvement in Wyatt's Rebellion.
•John Gerard, S.J., an English Jesuit priest operating undercover during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, when Catholics were being persecuted. He was captured and tortured and incarcerated in the Salt Tower before making a daring escape by rope across the moat.
•Sir Walter Raleigh spent thirteen years (1603-1616) imprisoned at the Tower but was able to live in relative comfort in the Bloody Tower with his wife and two children. For some of the time he even grew tobacco on Tower Green, just outside his apartment. While imprisoned, he wrote The History of the World.
•Nicholas Woodcock spent sixteen months in the "gatehouse and tower" for piloting the first Spanish whaleship to Spitsbergen in 1612.
•Niall Garve O'Donnell, an Irish nobleman, a one-time ally of the English against his cousin, Red Hugh O'Donnell.
•Guy Fawkes, famous for his part in the Gunpowder Plot, was brought to the Tower to be interrogated by a council of the King's Ministers. However, he was not executed at the tower. When he confessed, he was sentenced to be hanged, drawn and quartered in the Old Palace Yard at Westminster; however, he escaped his fate by jumping off the scaffold at the gallows which in turn broke his neck and killed him.
•Johan Anders Jägerhorn, a Swedish officer from Finland, Lord Edward FitzGerald's friend, participating in the Irish independence movement. He spent two years in the Tower (1799-1801), but was released because of Russian interests.
•Lord George Gordon, instigator of the Gordon Riots in 1780, spent 6 months in the Tower while awaiting trial on the charge of high treason.
•Rudolf Hess, deputy leader of the German Nazi Party, the last State prisoner to be held in the tower, in May 1941.
•The Kray twins, were among the last prisoners to be held,[25] for a few days in 1952, for failing to report for national service.
Inside the torture chambers of the tower various implements of torture were used such as the Scavenger’s daughter, a kind of compression device, and the Rack, also known as the Duke of Exeter's Daughter.[26][27]
Anne Askew is the only woman on record to have been tortured in the tower, after being taken there in 1546 on a charge of heresy. Sir Anthony Kingston, the Constable of the Tower of London, was ordered to torture Anne in an attempt to force her to name other Protestants. Anne was put on the Rack. Kingston was so impressed with the way Anne behaved that he refused to carry on torturing her, and Henry VIII's Lord Chancellor had to take over.
Lower-class criminals were usually executed by hanging at one of the public execution sites outside the Tower. High-profile convicts, such as Sir Thomas More, were publicly beheaded on Tower Hill. Seven nobles (five of them ladies) were beheaded privately on Tower Green, inside the complex, and then buried in the "Chapel Royal of St. Peter ad Vincula" (Latin for "in chains," making him an appropriate patron saint for prisoners) next to the Green. Some of the nobles who were executed outside the Tower are also buried in that chapel. (External link to Chapel webpage) The names of the seven beheaded on Tower Green for treason alone are:
•William Hastings, 1st Baron Hastings (1483)
•Anne Boleyn (1536)
•Margaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury (1541)
•Catherine Howard (1542)
•Jane Boleyn, Viscountess Rochford (1542)
•Lady Jane Grey (1554)
•Robert Devereux, 2nd Earl of Essex (1601)
George, Duke of Clarence, the brother of Edward IV of England, was executed for treason in the Tower in February 1478, but not by beheading (and probably not by being drowned in a butt of Malmsey wine, despite what Shakespeare wrote).
When Edward IV died, he left two young sons behind: the Princes in the Tower. His brother Richard, the Duke of Gloucester, was made Regent until the older of his two sons, Edward V, should come of age. According to Thomas More's History of Richard III, Richard hired men to kill them, and, one night, the two Princes were smothered with their pillows. Many years later, bones were found buried at the foot of a stairway in the Tower, which are thought to be those of the princes. Richard was crowned King Richard III of England.
The last execution at the Tower was that of German spy Josef Jakobs on 14 August 1941 by firing squad formed from the Scots Guards.
The military use of the Tower as a fortification, like that of other such castles, became obsolete with the introduction of artillery, and the moat was drained in 1830. However the Tower did serve as the headquarters of the Board of Ordnance until 1855, and the Tower was still occasionally used as a prison, even through both World Wars. In 1780, the Tower held its only American prisoner, former President of the Continental Congress, Henry Laurens. In World War I, eleven German spies were shot in the Tower. Irish rebel Roger Casement was imprisoned in the Tower during his trial on treason charges in 1916.
In 1942, Adolf Hitler's deputy, Rudolf Hess, was imprisoned in the tower for four days. During this time, RAF Wing Commander George Salaman was placed in the same cell undercover, impersonating a Luftwaffe officer, to spy on Hess. Although acting covertly and not held as a true inmate, Salaman remains the last Englishman to be locked in the Tower of London. The tower was used as a prison for German prisoners of war throughout the conflict.
Waterloo Barracks, the location of the Crown Jewels, remained in use as a base for the 1st Battalion Royal Fusiliers (City of London Regiment) into the 1950s; during 1952, the Kray twins were briefly held there for failing to report for national service, making them among the last prisoners of the Tower; the last British citizen held for any length of time was the traitorous Army officer Norman Baillie-Stewart from 1933 to 1937.

Although it is no longer a royal residence, the Tower officially remains a royal palace and maintains a permanent guard: this is found by the unit forming the Queen's Guard at Buckingham Palace. Two sentries are maintained during the hours that the Tower is open, with one stationed outside the Jewel House and one outside the Queen's House.
In 1974, there was a bomb explosion in the Mortar Room in the White Tower, leaving one person dead and 35 injured. No one claimed responsibility for the blast, however the police were investigating suspicions that the IRA was behind it.[28]
In 2007, Moira Cameron became the first female Beefeater in history to go on duty at the Tower of London. Cameron beat five men to the job as a Yeomen Warder.
The Tower was featured in the BBC documentary series Tales from the Palaces.
On July 18, 2009, USS Halyburton became the first non-British ship to take part in the Tower's Constable's Dues ritual. Dating back to the 14th century, it involved the crew being challenged for entry into the capital, mirroring an ancient custom in which a ship had to unload some of its cargo for the sovereign to enter the city. Commander Michael P Huck led the crew to the Tower's West Gate, where after being challenged for entry by the Yeoman Gaoler armed with his axe, they were marched to Tower Green accompanied by Beefeaters, where they delivered a keg of Castillo Silver Rum, representing the dues, to the Tower's Constable, Sir Roger Wheeler.[29]
The Tower of London and its surrounding area has always had a separate administration from the adjacent City of London. It was under the jurisdiction of Constable of the Tower who also held authority over the Tower liberties until 1894. In addition the Constable was ex-officio Lord Lieutenant of the Tower division of Middlesex until 1889 and head of the Tower Hamlets Militia until 1871. Today the Tower is within the boundaries of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets.

The tower is fully staffed with 35 Yeomen Warders (also known as Beefeaters), at all times, the most senior is titled the Chief Yeoman Warder, and his second-in-command is titled the Yeoman Gaoler, they answer to the Constable of the Tower. Yeomen Warders have served as defenders of the Crown Jewels, prison guards, and, since the time of Queen Victoria, tour guides to visitors, and they have become a tourist attraction in their own right, something the warders themselves acknowledge. The current role of the Yeoman Warder is that of tour guides, and, should the need arise, prison guards.

The Crown Jewels have been kept at the Tower of London since 1303, after they were stolen from Westminster Abbey. It is thought that most, if not all, were recovered shortly afterwards. After the coronation of Charles II, they were locked away and shown for a viewing fee paid to a custodian. However, this arrangement ended when Colonel Thomas Blood stole the Crown Jewels after having bound and gagged the custodian. Thereafter, the Crown Jewels were kept in a part of the Tower known as Jewel House, where armed guards defended them. They were temporarily taken out of the Tower during World War II and reportedly were secretly kept in the basement vaults of the Sun Life Insurance company in Montreal, Canada, along with the gold bullion of the Bank of England.
The Tower of London is reputedly the most haunted building in England. The ghost of Queen Anne Boleyn, beheaded in 1536 for treason against King Henry VIII, has allegedly been seen haunting the chapel of St Peter-ad-Vincula, where she is buried, and walking around the White Tower carrying her head under her arm. Other ghosts include Henry VI, Lady Jane Grey, Margaret Pole, and the Princes in the Tower. In January 1816 a sentry on guard outside the Jewel House witnessed an inexplicable apparition of a bear advancing towards him. The sentry reportedly died of fright a few days later.[30][31]
•The Tower of London, as a place of death, darkness and treachery, is most famously evoked in William Shakespeare's play, Richard III, where it forms the backdrop of Richard's seizure of the throne and the scene of the notorious murder of the Princes in the Tower, and other victims (see above). A classic film version of this is Richard III (1955) with Laurence Olivier in the title role. This story is also reprised in the historical horror film Tower of London (1939) and its 1962 remake.
•The Tower of London (1840) by William Harrison Ainsworth though written in fictional form, contrives to give a detailed account of the history and architecture of the Tower. He however included extensive underground passages and dungeons which did not actually exist.
•The Tower is the setting for Gilbert and Sullivan's 1888 light opera The Yeomen of the Guard.
•Apparitions of Anne Boleyn at the Tower are the theme of the song "With Her Head Tucked Underneath Her Arm".
•The Mad Hatter Mystery, a detective novel by John Dickson Carr, where the Tower serves as scene of a murder (Harper & Row Inc., New York, 1933, 1961).
•The Tower Of London features frequently, and is described in exhaustive detail, in Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle, especially The System of the World, in which the tower is the setting for one of the series' grandest set pieces.
•The Tower Of London also features in the 2005 Christmas special of the long-running BBC television science fiction series Doctor Who, in which it was the secret headquarters of fictional military organisation UNIT.
•The Tower is the setting for the final battle in the anime version of Hellsing, where Alucard faces against Incognito.
•The Tower is the setting for Johnny English when the crown jewels are stolen by Pascal Sauvage.
•Sent by Margaret Peterson Haddix, Jonah and Katherine try to save their friends Chip and Alex from the Tower of London.
•The Tower of London is often portrayed in the Bartimaeus Trilogy, by Jonathan Stroud, as a prison.
•In the novel 'Stars and Stripes triumphant' the Tower of London is partially destroyed by invading American ironclads. 

Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 15:58






 

War Society, Collapse and the University: an interview with Robert Jensen

 

Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 08:14
DINOSAURES JURA
FRANCHE-COMTE
DIPLODOCUS
SUISSE

SITE A TRACES DE DINOSAURES
SAUROPODES    THEROPODE

COISIA


http://images.google.fr/images?hl=fr&um=1&sa=1&q=coisia+dinosaure&btnG=Recherche+d%27images&aq=f&oq=&start=0
LOULLE

http://www.jura-tourism.com/le-retour-des-dinosaures-dans-le-massif-du-jura-!,r28,d449.html

http://images.google.fr/images?hl=fr&source=hp&q=loulle%20dinosaure&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

http://www.flickr.com/photos/francois_bonneville/sets/72157604430499291/

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2085/2396610792_169c0bf6ba_o.jpg


COISIA   SITE VERTICAL


LOULLE  TRACES HORIZONTALES
THEROPODE CARNASSIER

http://www.juramusees.fr/1/musee/musees/histoire_naturelle/-b9eaca2121.html


http://www.panoramio.com/photo/14634817

 

Des milliers de traces de dinosaures sauropodes (genre diplodocus) ont été trouvées depuis 2006 sur la carrière de Loulle dans le Jura. Contrairement à d'autres sites, aucune trace d'autres dinosaures n'avaient encore été trouvée... Jusqu'en juillet 2008.
 Le décapage du sol de la carrière par des chercheurs et des étudiants a permis de dégager cette trace (puis quelques autres) de théropode, carnassier, sans doute le prédateur des grands diplodocus.
 Une découverte exceptionnelle qui fait du site paléontologique de Loulle l'un des tout premiers au monde. La photo a été prise le lendemain de la découverte.
Pas de dinousaure à Loulle (Jura) par François Bonneville

--

http://www.jura-tourism.com/le-retour-des-dinosaures-dans-le-massif-du-jura-!,r28,d449.html


LOULLE  39

http://www.juramusees.fr/1/musee/musees/histoire_naturelle/-b9eaca2121.html


http://www.panoramio.com/photo/14634817


http://www.flickr.com/photos/francois_bonneville/sets/72157604430499291/

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2085/2396610792_169c0bf6ba_o.jpg


http://images.google.fr/images?hl=fr&source=hp&q=loulle%20dinosaure&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

COISIA 39



http://images.google.fr/images?hl=fr&um=1&sa=1&q=coisia+dinosaure&btnG=Recherche+d%27images&aq=f&oq=&start=0












-

Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 08:13
Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 08:12
Big Crash Coming?

 

Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 08:11
Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 08:06


BAUME LES MESSIEURS

39 JURA CLUNY
LIEU DE DEPART DE SIX MOINES FONDATEURS DE CLUNY

http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=all&q=baume+les+messieurs&m=text






http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=all&q=baume+les+messieurs&m=text





Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 07:57
Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article
1 novembre 2009 7 01 /11 /novembre /2009 07:56
Repost 0
Published by @@@
commenter cet article

Rechercher

Archives