Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE IV USED to administer a lethal injection to a US death row inmate during a recent botched execution was badly placed and not properly monitored, an inquiry has found.
Clayton Lockett, a convicted murderer and rapist, was put to death in Oklahoma on 29 April using an untested three-drug protocol in a process that took 43 minutes — well over the expected time of a little over 10 minutes.
Authorities said Lockett, who was seen writhing in pain, bucking off the gurney and mumbling unintelligibly, ultimately died of a massive heart attack.
The incident drew widespread condemnation and led the state to temporarily halt executions and order an investigation.
According to a 32-page report made public by the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety, “the physician and paramedic attempted IV placement access in multiple locations and were unsuccessful” before doing so in the right groin area and administering the anesthetic Midazolam followed by the two other drugs.
The physician noticed the IV failure some 20 minutes later when the inmate “began to move and make sounds on the execution table.”
While trying in vain to insert the IV into the femoral artery and elsewhere,” the physician made the observation that the drugs appeared to be absorbing into Lockett’s tissue.”
His heart stopped shortly after the execution was interrupted and he was pronounced dead at 7:06 pm, 43 minutes after the first injection at 6:23 pm, the report said.
“This investigation concluded the viability of the IV access point was the single greatest factor that contributed to the difficulty in administering the execution drugs,” the investigators said.However, “the IV failure complicated the ability to determine the effectiveness of the drugs,” they added.
The investigators listed a series of recommendations, including the creation of a “formal and continuing training program for execution personnel.”
Lawyers for death row inmates regularly criticise what they see as the lack of qualifications of those administering lethal injections in the 32 US states that allow capital punishment.
The report calls for executions not to be scheduled within seven calendar days of each other, highlighting that it was “apparent the stress level” at the facility in question was elevated because two executions were scheduled for 29 April — a first since 2000.
In the end, the second one was called off due to what happened with Lockett.
The report also recommends that an IV catheter insertion point or points “should remain visible during all phases of the execution and continuously observed by a person with proper medical training in assessing the ongoing viability of an IV.”
More questions than answers
In a statement, Lockett’s lawyer said “the state’s internal investigation raises more questions than it answers.”
“Once the execution was clearly going wrong, it should have been stopped, but it wasn’t,” Dale Baich said.
“Whoever allowed the execution to continue needs to be held accountable,” he added, noting that a pending federal lawsuit now presented the “best chance” to determine what happened.
Deborah Denno, a professor at Fordham University School of Law, said the the challenges with IV access, hindered visibility and inadequately trained personnel were all foreseeable problems in Lockett’s case due to previously botched executions.
“The need for more ‘thorough research and review’ of these procedures has been urged repeatedly over the decades, yet regularly ignored by departments of corrections,” she said in an email.
“Our country’s confidence in states’ abilities to conduct executions properly has reached the lowest point.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
future data centre should be banned unless they pay for their own source of energy and maintenance, independently of the grid.
@Dominic Leleu: Independently of the grid? How does that work? Should data centers have their own in-built nuclear power stations, or would you prefer they burn coal?
@Jason Memail: they should have their own wind turbines. There are several companies in Cork harbour each have their own huge wind turbine. It should be mandatory for data centres.
@Padraig: If it was possible that wind turbines alone could provide enough power to consistently run a data centre (it’s not), why wouldn’t companies build them today instead of buying electricity from the grid?
@Padraig: So when you need information stored files from a data centre they will say “The answer is blowing in the wind”
@Jason Memail: I know that. But they need to making a big contribution to their own power.
@Dominic Leleu: How about solving the problem rather than trying to block freedom of speech provided by information technology. “Designed in the late 1960s to meet increasing demand for electricity from the expanding economy, the plant’s job was to deliver instantaneous power to support households across the State as more people started switching on cookers and lights and firing up home heating systems.
From the outset, Turlough Hill could ramp up to full power of 292MW in just 70 seconds, enough electricity for 300,000 homes, ensuring the State system could keep up with rising demand for electricity at peak times.
At night, when demand for electricity is at its lowest, the water is pumped back up through the hill to refill the upper lake.”
@thomas molloy: Turlough Hill is on a twice daily cycle, 250MW down, 350MW pump back up. All done “in house” by the ESB off the Moneypoint coal. Wind power is just a complete and very expensive waste of time Subsidy Harvesting and wont financially carry supplying storage for free. There is only one way to power data centres and that’s SMRs. If we dont have them here, then it makes no difference to Climate Change, if they are somewhere else.. No one baring the French will be meeting their Paris obligations. Ger real.
@Jason Memail: wouldn’t be entertaining a silly comment.
Should have been this way from the start. Zero common sense!
@John Paul Long: agreed. Pure lunacy and yet I can’t cut a bit of turf. That’s the Greens for ya.
@Fergus O’Donnell: i thought the whole thing was you can cut turf, you just can’t sell it commercially?
@Fergus O’Donnell: The article says generators at Data Centres emitted 125,000 tonnes CO2 over 3 years, or 41,666 tonnes per year. This is 0.1% of national emissions (50 to 55 million tonnes CO2 per year).
On the other hand, the dairy sector emissions increased 95% over 20 years, by an extra 2.4 million tonnes CO2 equivalent per year (more than 50 times the CO2 emissions from the generators at data centres), and this comes with the additional cost of polluting Irish rivers and putting African farmers out of business. But you can talk negatively of farming. It’s almost like data centres are used as a distraction from noticing larger and more polluting sectors.
Data centres are a problem, I don’t deny this. But it’s not CO2 emissions, it’s their expanding use of electricity.
@John Paul Long: This is nothing new. Proper datacenters already have backup generators in case the mains fail. They can even back feed into the grid when demand is high.
The fụck’s the point of going green if these big corpos just completely offsets all efforts while we’re being taxed to death for it on top if it!!?
@Kieran Menon: OPTICS
@Kieran Menon: backhanders and optics. Usual pigs at the trough.
@Kieran Menon: that is the point. It’s a compete scam.
@Kieran Menon: The article says generators at Data Centres emitted 125,000 tonnes CO2 over 3 years, or 41,666 tonnes per year. This is 0.1% of national emissions (50 to 55 million tonnes CO2 per year).
@Kieran Menon: who’s going green? ireland are one of the biggest polluters per capita in europe.
Please mr Facebook twitter amazon…please look like your doing something so we can make it look like we’re doing something…please sir ..you don’t have to ..thank you sir.thank you very much sir…
@David Cotter: why not use apple taxes for capital spending to build hydro electric generators. The Shannon hydroelectric Scheme was a major development by the Irish Free State in the 1920s to harness the power of the River Shannon. Its product, the Ardnacrusha power plant, is a hydroelectric power station located near Ardnacrusha within County Clare approximately 2.4 kilometres (1.5 mi) from the Limerick border. It is Ireland’s largest river hydroelectric scheme and is operated on a purpose built headrace connected to the River Shannon. The plant includes fish ladders so that returning fish, such as salmon, can climb the river safely past the power station.
@thomas molloy: Ardnacrusha generates 80MW at full power. e.g. for 60% of the year. Our present average load is over 5000MW., increasing fast. A SMR like the whole World are suddenly on about, is around 300MW. The great guru of Global Warming, Prof.James Hansen now says the whole issue is coming on far faster than they predicted and the only way to counter it is with a mass move into Nuclear.
The article says generators at Data Centres emitted 125,000 tonnes CO2 over 3 years, or 41,666 tonnes per year. This is 0.1% of national emissions (50 to 55 million tonnes CO2 per year).
On the other hand, 37.8% of national CO2 eq. emissions is from agriculture (2023 figures), and substantial proportion of this is from the dairy sector.
Emissions from the dairy sector increased 95% between 2000 and 2017, mostly attributed to the abolition of the EU milk quota and subsequent massive expansion of the dairy herd. Dairy emissions increased by 157.7 tonnes per dairy farm year between 2010 and 2017. In 2010 there were 15,654 dairy farms, in 2020 there were 15,319 dairy farms. Thus, their total emissions increased by 2.4 millon tonnes CO2 per year, a 4% increase on nations emissions.
Over 90% of milk products are is exported, most to the UK and other EU countries, but also increasingly to China and Africa (encurring futher CO2 emissions from transport). Cheap EU milk is putting African farmers out of business.
https://www.thejournal.ie/creamed-off-dairy-exports-6461193-Aug2024/
Additionally, the expansion of the dairy sector incresed agricultural pollution, with nitrates in rivers increasing year on year. See:
“Rivers and lakes face pollution crisis caused by Ireland’s dairy industry”
Total CO2 eq. emissions from the dairy sector are about 100 times the emissions from data centre generators (Emissions from the dairy sector fell back slightly in the last few years).
The problem of data centres isn’t their CO2 emissions, it’s their disproportionate electricity use which indeed threatens grid stability.
Ref.:
Läpple, D., Carter, C.A. and Buckley, C., 2022. EU milk quota abolition, dairy expansion, and greenhouse gas emissions. Agricultural Economics, 53(1), pp.125-142.
@David Jordan: and how much of the atmosphere is C02?
@David Jordan: you should look up the carbon cycle. And you might realise that the agricultural emissions don’t stack up, and It’s what the fuel industry wants you to believe because it makes them look good.
@Jim: 427.24 ppm, and the highest level in c. 16 million years. CO2 levels increased by 50% since 1900, 41% of this increase is due to the addition of 2.5 trillion tonnes of CO2 from fossil fuels and land use changes e.g. cutting down vast tracts of forest.
https://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/
Friedlingstein, P., O’sullivan, M., Jones, M.W., Andrew, R.M., Hauck, J., Olsen, A., Peters, G.P., Peters, W., Pongratz, J., Sitch, S. and Le Quéré, C., 2020. Global carbon budget 2020. Earth System Science Data Discussions, 2020, pp.1-3.
The other question is why does such a relatively small amount of added gas have such a pronounced warming effect, with global temperature rising ten times faster than the end of the last ice age and reaching levels not seen in the last 130,000 years?
https://imgur.com/gallery/global-temperature-co2-levels-last-2000-years-5ioVzFY
Firstly the science behind the greenhouse effect in not new, it was first discovered by the French scientist and mathematician Joseph Fourier, who wrote in 1827,…
“As a dam built across a river causes a local deepening of the stream, so our atmosphere, thrown as a barrier across the terrestrial rays, produces a local heightening of the temperature at the Earth’s surface.”
The mistake you make is to think of CO2 as a once off deposit, but CO2 is an interest rate (global temperature is money in a bank account). Added CO2 and other greenhouse gasses accrue interest, adding a fraction of a penny to Earth’s temperature each day/night cycle, this build ups. There have been more than 45,625 days of accrued interest since 1900.
For example, if an ancestor of mine deposited £15 (analogous to 15 Celsius) in a bank account in 1900, with a tiny interest rate of only 0.04% per year (analogous to CO2 levels), the bank account would contain £15.77 by 2025, an increase of 5.1% (analogous to temperature increase).
This is how low levels of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses warm the planet (there is also an important amplifying effect of increased evaporation, from water vapour).
@David Jordan: that’s a great way of saying 0.004%
The information you are providing is pretty much meaningless & you are presenting the “warming effect” out of context.
It’s quite interesting the ‘studies’ you are quoting, their sources of funding & the counter studies which tell a different story but you wouldn’t know that because you are uding a GPT.
Funny how those desperate to ‘convince’ others of their argument try to baffle with reams of ‘information’ pulled from many sources.
The fact is, there is no “climate change” there is an environmental catastrophe created in the name of combating a scam.
It’s good to see that data centres won’t be subjected to any harmful caps on their fossil fuel usage. However, future data centres should also have the renewable energy requirement waved in order to make sure that they are maximising their output. I hope someday Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil give up on their renewable energy fantasy and stop forcing the rest of the economy to change over as well. Renewable energy simply isn’t working. The sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow. Look at what happened to Germany. They relied on renewable energy so much that they had power shortages. Then they were forced to import coal from Poland and Russia, the worst pollutant of all and energy prices tripled. Despite being subsidised for 25 years, renewables only make up 14% of our energy.
Solar powered or diesel?
have your say