Environment

Global warming, healthy food, clean water, population control, and nature protection. Comprehensive coverage on Environment here.

Copenhagen Is On; Obama to Lead U.S. Delegation
Posted by Jeff McMahon, True/Slant on November 26, 2009 at 4:00 AM.

First the climate bill was dead, then the climate bill was not dead yet, then Copenhagen was dead, then Copenhagen was not dead yet, and now it’s all back on the table, right where President Obama said it would be: a legally binding climate treaty calling for an ambitious reduction in carbon dioxide–83 percent by 2050.

Patience, people, patience.

Obama’s call for such a treaty today closely follows three other significant events:

• His announcement that he’ll attend the Copenhagen Climate Conference on Dec. 9 to call for the treaty in person. I’ve always said that his decision to attend would depend on the likelihood of a treaty being signed, and the likelihood of a treaty being signed would be worked out behind the scenes in meetings between diplomats from the U.S. and other major players. But not only is Obama attending, according to the White House:

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, Energy Secretary Steven Chu, and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson are all scheduled to attend, along with Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, and Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change Carol Browner.

• Obama’s announcement follows key meetings between Obama and the leaders of China and India, the two developing nations whose participation in the treaty is most essential to its success.

• The treaty Obama has called for matches the climate bill that already passed the House and the one likely to pass the Senate: not the bill that passed the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, but the one likely to be worked out in a compromise with that bill’s sole no vote, Sen. Max Baucus. Both the House bill and the likely Baucus compromise call for a 17 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2020.

For the first time, the U.S. delegation will have a U.S. Center at the conference, providing a unique and interactive forum to share our story with the world. In addition to working with other countries to advance American interests, U.S. delegates will keynote a series of events highlighting actions by the Obama Administration to provide domestic and global leadership in the transition to a clean energy economy. Topics will range from energy efficiency investments and global commitments to renewables policy and clean energy jobs.

China on Reducing Its Carbon Footprint: Why Should We Have to?
Posted by Robert Dreyfuss, The Nation on November 24, 2009 at 3:29 PM.

BEIJING -- Ambassador Yu Qingtai is China's point man on global warming. As special representative to the climate change talks for China's ministry of foreign affairs, Yu is a forceful advocate for China's view that while his country will do its part, the primary responsibility for fixing the problem rests squarely on the shoulders of the United States and other industrialized countries. And he bristles when reminded that many US experts put on the onus on China's rapidly growing economy and industrial might.

"There were those who came to China years ago and described us as a kingdom of bicycles," he says, when I mention some of that criticism. We're sitting in a conference room at the foreign ministry, where Yu has come to be questioned by a small group of journalists invited to Beijing by the Chinese People's Institute for Foreign Affairs. As China modernizes, he says, every Chinese citizen has the right to all of the modern industrial and transportation options enjoyed by, say, Americans – including the right to own a car. "We should not be expected to stay forever as a kingdom of bicycles!" he says.

He has a point.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Buying Sarah Palin's Book Will Help Save Wolves?
Posted by Tana Ganeva, AlterNet on November 18, 2009 at 6:16 PM.

Sarah Palin's new book may serve a purpose beyond keeping the AP busy and relaunching the hilariously petty sniping between Palin and former McCain campaign aides: it can, counterintuitively, help Alaska's wolves. San Francisco's Green Apple books has announced that %100 of the proceeds from sales of Going Rogue will go to the Alaska Wildlife Federation.  From the bookstore's blog: 

With all due to respect to the Republicans who were as overjoyed as I was (for different reasons, of course) by Sarah Palin's nomination to the McCain ticket last year, Green Apple is donating 100% of the profits from sales of Sarah Palin's Going Rogue: An American Life to the Alaska Wildlife Alliance.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Sorry Monsanto, You're Wrong: More GE Crops Mean More Pesticides
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on November 17, 2009 at 3:25 PM.

More genetically engineered crops means less pesticides are needed, right? That's what the big agricultural biotech companies, like Monsanto, promised. But, a report proves they're wrong. Really wrong.

First, the report was funded by a coalition of non-governmental organizations including the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Center for Food Safety, the Cornerstone Campaign, Californians for GE-Free Agriculture, Greenpeace International and Rural Advancement Fund International USA.

They found that GE corn, soybean, and cotton crops have increased the use of weed-killing herbicides in the U.S. by 383 million pounds from 1996 to 2008. Why? Because the idea behind many of the big GE crops is to make them resistant to herbicides, for instance Roundup Ready Soybeans won't be killed if you spray the herbicide Roundup on them. Roundup instead is suppose to kill the weeds around the plant. But, crafty little nature has outsmarted biotech again and now we've got weeds that have become resistant as well. Woops.

So, maybe the biotech industry shouldn't be making farmers pay through the nose for these seeds, eh? Here's some more info from the report about the pickle farmers are in now, thanks to GE crops:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Under Pressure From Tea Party Activists, Charleston GOP Censures Lindsey Graham For Bipartisanship
Posted by Lee Fang, Think Progress on November 11, 2009 at 3:32 PM.

On Monday, the Charleston County Republican Party’s executive committee “took the unusual step” of officially censuring Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). The local GOP committee admonished Graham for stepping across party lines to work with Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) on a bipartisan clean energy bill and other pieces of legislation. The censure stated that Graham’s “bipartisanship continues to weaken the Republican brand and tarnish the ideals of freedom.”

Part of the fury from the right against Graham is being spurred by the oil and coal industry. The oil company front group “American Energy Alliance” has blanketed South Carolina with ads smearing Graham for seeking to address climate change.

The pressure against Graham has also stemmed from his criticism of hate radio and Fox News host Glenn Beck. “Only in America can you make that much money crying,” said Graham, mocking Beck in early October. Beck has responded with a slime campaign against Graham that he typically reserves for liberals. The leader of the Charleston Republican Party, Lin Bennett, is also a member of Glenn Beck’s 9/12 organization in South Carolina. According to its website, the Charleston GOP claims to work closely with tea party groups and Beck’s 9/12 activists in selecting its favored candidates.

Will Graham be able to stand up to the angry backlash being cultivated by far right voices and entrenched corporations interests? At a Graham town hall in Greenville last month, activist Harry Kimball of “RINO HUNT” protested by constructing a display that portrayed Graham, as well as other GOP moderates, being flushed down a toilet:

KIMBALL: This is for every RINO who has failed to represent us. [...] [the toilet represents] flushing them, flushing them.

Graham’s spokesman defended his boss to reporters yesterday, claiming the senator has a “90 percent conservative voting record.” Unfortunately for Graham, that may not prevent him from being “Scozzafavaed.”

Watch it to the right.

PETA Teams Up With Glenn Beck to Bash Al Gore
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on November 6, 2009 at 5:39 PM.

I know it's easy to get jealous when someone's got an Oscar, a Nobel, and some pretty big job titles on their resume, but really, the Gore bashing has got to end.

The New York Times took a swipe at Al Gore and his new book this week and now Glenn Beck and PETA's Ingrid Newkirk are teaming up. In some ways it is a perfect match between two people who seem to thrive on generating controversy.

Beck chastised Gore for not giving up meat eating altogether (even though he's admitted to cutting back a lot) and told him it was time for soy milk and tofurkey. Then he invited Newkirk on the show to tag team even though Beck admitted that he doesn't agree with a thing PETA says. Although he did give PETA and the NRA a shout out for not catering to special interests (huh?), so I guess Newkirk should feel good about that.

I know that PETA's main task seems to be to get people really pissed off, but I still think it's a shame to see Newkirk sinking so low as to cozy up to Glenn Beck. The truth is though, what they're talking about is actually a tough issue. There's a lot of really good evidence that eating meat -- at least the way we mostly do it in factory farms -- is bad for the planet. If you've ever seen a factory farm (or smelled one) that would probably seem like a no-brainer.

But there's also some good evidence pointing out that growing soy -- at least the way we do it but slashing rainforests and piling on the pesticides -- is actually bad for ecosystems, water, climate and the whole shebang. And some of that soy we area eating (actually in the US 87 percent of it is genetically modified), some of it is being used for biofuel and some of it is being fed to livestock. But mostly all of it is an environmental disaster.

Umbra Fisk from Grist breaks down a lot of the research and writes:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Climate Change: The Grown-Ups Are Back In Charge
Posted by Raquel Brown, The Media Consortium on November 6, 2009 at 5:00 PM.

Senate Democrats in the Environment and Public Works Committee finally squelched Republican boycotts and passed a version of the climate bill Wednesday morning. Last week, Republican senators refused to show up to committee hearings in an attempt to stall the bill. Brian Beutler of Talking Points Memo notes that EPW has now set “the stage for other panels to amend the legislation.”

To no one’s surprise, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., immediately complained about the legislation on Fox News. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., was the lone Democrat that did not vote, which Inhofe interpreted as a sign that the bill is “dead.”

Chairman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., was much more upbeat and argued that the Republican boycott actually marred their credibility. “The absence of the Republicans during the Environmental Protection Agency’s presentation was a clear message that their criticism of the EPA analysis was not a substantive one,” Boxer said. “We are pleased that despite the Republican boycott, we have been able to move the bill.”

Inhofe also condemned Boxer for passing the bill through the committee unconventionally. Aaron Wiener writes for The Washington Independent that “Without a quorum that included at least two Republicans, the committee was unable to open formal debate on amendments to the bill. But passage requires just a simple majority, and Chairman Boxer and the Democratic leadership chose to forgo amendments in order to move the legislation quickly, given that the end of the GOP boycott was nowhere in sight.”  Luckily, now that the bill is moving on to other committees, Inhofe and his Republican EPW colleagues will no longer have much of a say on the bill’s final outcome.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

On the Lookout for Attempts to Indoctrinate Our Schoolchildren? Try the American Coal Industry!
Posted by Amanda Terkel, Think Progress on November 6, 2009 at 2:57 PM.

Friends of Coal (FOC) is a front group created by the West Virginia Coal Association. Its mission is to “inform and educate West Virginia citizens about the coal industry” and “provide a united voice” for the industry. To make dirty coal seem appealing, FOC has sponsored or initiated license plates, football games, basketball practices, plane jumps, fishing events, and scholarships.

FOC is now selling coal to children. ThinkProgress obtained the “Let’s Learn About Coal” coloring book, which asks children to unscramble statements about the “advantages” of coal, such as “Than coal other cheaper is fuels” (”Coal is cheaper than other fuels”). Kids also learn that coal is “important” and “provides jobs for lots of people!”:

The FOC Ladies Auxiliary has been handing the coloring book out to children around West Virginia as part of a “Coal in the Classroom” campaign.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Grist on the NYT's "Baseless Hit Job on Al Gore"
Posted by Dr. Joseph Romm, Climate Progress on November 5, 2009 at 3:30 PM.

Al Gore is in the spotlight again with his must-read solutions book — "Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis." And that means the daggers are out.  But who would have imagined that one of the first pieces would be by the NYT's John Broder, who repeats the false claims by "Critics, mostly on the political right and among global warming skeptics," that "Mr. Gore is poised to become the world's first ‘carbon billionaire,' profiteering from government policies he supports that would direct billions of dollars to the business ventures he has invested in."  I'm going to repost a piece by Media Matters from May that looks at one of the despicable origins of this smear, "O'Reilly Factor guest host Laura Ingraham presented clips of Al Gore's recent congressional testimony that had been edited to remove his statements that he donates the money he makes from his climate-related work to a non-profit organization."

But first I'm going to repost a response to the NYT piece by Grist's Dave Roberts:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

GOP Senators on Environment Committee Hit All-Time Low, Third-Graders Have More Maturity
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on November 4, 2009 at 1:59 PM.

Keeping in step with the rest of the Party of No, this week 6 of the 7 Republicans on the Senate's Environment and Public Works committee are refusing to show up in a desperate attempt to stall action on the climate and clean energy bill.

Reminder me again why these people are paid public servants?

Their apparent gripe is that they want EPA to do more extensive modeling runs on the proposed legislation. But really, what they want is to make sure we never have a viable climate bill and most certainly not before Copenhagen.

Of course, the EPA has already done modeling on all of this -- 90 percent is the same as the House bill from last Spring. The Washington Post reported that the data was analyzed closely by EPA, the Congressional Budget Office, the Energy Information Administration and many NGOs. "Indeed, EPA Associate Administrator David McIntosh said Tuesday that the differences wouldn't even show up in the agency's computer modeling, leaving little reason to conduct a completely new analysis before committee work commences," the Washington Post reported.

So, their stunt is pure bogus and their motivation is equally sad. Noreen Nielson, Director for Energy Communications at Progressive Media writes:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Meet Some of the People Who Have Jobs Thanks to Obama's Recovery Act
Posted by Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins, AlterNet on November 4, 2009 at 11:46 AM.

640,329

That figure represents the number of jobs that have been created or saved so far through the Recovery Act, according to a report released by the Obama administration on Friday.

But the true significance of this number lies in the people behind it.

People like Thalia Williams. Thalia is a single mother of a 3-year-old son, in Brooklyn, NY. "Construction is something that I wanted to do for a long time," she said. "I had no way of knowing how to get into this field because I always heard it was a man's world."

Now, thanks to an organization that is able to expand and recruit women using Recovery Act funds, Thalia has a job weatherizing homes in New York.

Watch her story here.

Thalia is just one of thousands of people who are finding jobs, hope, and opportunity in the clean-energy economy.

Their stories show the true return on investment that America’s communities are reaping from Recovery Act funding. (You can see more stories from the growing green economy on Green For All’s Green Economy Roadmap).

With just over one-quarter of the Recovery funds paid out, the jobs and opportunity created will only grow in the coming months.

In addition to creating jobs in the short term, the Recovery Act is proving to be an essential jumpstart to the clean-energy economy, seeding new programs and expanding successful models across the country.

But the Recovery Act was primarily meant to stabilize our economy in the midst of a sweeping recession, and most funding from the Act will end by 2011. To build a thriving, healthy economy for future generations, we need long-term investment and policies.

Congress now has the historic opportunity to provide that long-term stability, and build on the foundation laid by the Recovery Act through climate and clean-energy legislation.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Can Boxer Deliver Real Reform on Climate Change?
Posted by Raquel Brown, The Media Consortium on November 3, 2009 at 9:10 AM.

This week the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee held three hearings on the Kerry-Boxer clean energy bill and, as David Roberts reports for Grist, Republican Senators had an “adolescent tantrum” about the cost of emission reductions. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Congressional Budget Office, Energy Information Administration and other organizations have extensively debunked this line of debate.

Aaron Wiener agrees that the committee’s hearing was a “fairly one-sided debate” in The Washington Independent. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) has already threatened a Republican boycott of the Committee’s markup of the Kerry-Boxer bill, which would prevent the quorum needed to do business. And on Tuesday, every Republican cut out early while Democrats discussed energy policy details with members of the Obama administration. Considering that the bill isn’t even at the markup stage, we can expect more disruptive antics from the right in weeks to come.

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

50 Things Restaurant Servers Should Never Do
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on October 30, 2009 at 3:00 PM.

The New York Times has a blog post up now (part 1 of "100 Things") that outlines the best etiquette for restaurant employees. And no, this is not a 'remember to wash your hands' or 'don't spit in the food' kind of list -- it's a bit above that. Having worked only briefly in food service at one of my first jobs, I have to say that being a great server is really hard and I definitely notice and appreciate immensely when it is done well.

I agree with just about everything on the list except for number 6: "Do not lead the witness with, 'Bottled water or just tap?' Both are fine. Remain neutral." Actually, unless you are some place where the tap water is not drinkable, then I'd say, ditch the bottled water, like so many high-end (and other) restaurants are starting to do. It's better for the environment and often is actually better quality water, too.

Here's one of my favorites from the list: "If someone likes a wine, steam the label off the bottle and give it to the guest with the bill. It has the year, the vintner, the importer, etc." I've never seen that done before, but I'd be super impressed!

Here's a couple more good ones:

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

University Of Kentucky Approves New $7 Million Industry-Funded Dorm Named After Coal
Posted by Amanda Terkel, Think Progress on October 28, 2009 at 9:15 PM.

You can’t make this stuff up, as this Think Progress repost makes clear.

A group led by Alliance Coal CEO Joseph Craft recently proposed donating $7 million to the University of Kentucky for a new dorm for the men’s basketball team. The catch, however, is that the dorm would have to be named after Craft’s true love: coal. The proposed change sparked intense protests from local environmentalists and students. One professor said that as universities become “models for new energy sources,” putting “coal” on a prominent building could “make it difficult to attract top students and faculty members to the university.”

[JR:  Yes, coal industry will spend millions for a new dorm -- and yet Massey Energy refused to fund a new school so students can move away from coal processing plant!]

Yesterday afternoon, the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees voted 16-3 to approve the proposal for the new dorm, which will be named the “Wildcat Coal Lodge.” Significantly, two of the “no” votes were from faculty representative Ernie Yanarella and Student Government President Ryan Smith, who said he opposed the motion “as a voice for the student body.”

Students in the audience were reportedly not allowed to speak at the meeting. After the vote, people began chanting, “Move forward, not backward,” forcing the trustees to temporarily recess. More on the events at the meeting:

The vote set off shouts from about 30 protesters, mostly students, who attended the meeting.

“Big Coal is about to go down, and the university’s going down with them,” said Cor de Jong, who described himself as “a Lexingtonian and a basketball fan.”

A statement from students was passed out to board members moments before the vote. “They did not read our statement,” said Katie Goldey, a senior majoring in international studies. “They weren’t even given a chance to read it.”

Read the rest of the post on the flip side »

Sorry Deniers, There's No Such Thing as 'Global Cooling'
Posted by Tara Lohan, AlterNet on October 28, 2009 at 11:15 AM.

The latest plot by some global warming deniers is to push a bogus 'theory' that the earth is actually cooling, instead of warming. But the AP's Seth Borenstein took the hot air out of their sails. In his recent story, Borenstein explains that the AP gave temperature data to four independent statisticians to see what kinds of trends they found. "The experts found no true temperature declines over time," he reports. Instead, they found "a distinct decades-long upward trend," which of course has been backed up by the world's leading scientists for years.

So who's behind the global cooling charade? You may be surprised. The BBC recently ran a poorly researched news story and so did the New York Times' Andrew Revkin. But the most attention lately has come from the new book, Super Freakonomics: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance, by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. The authors wrote, "Then there's this little-discussed fact about global warming: While the drumbeat of doom has grown louder over the past several years, the average global temperature during that time has in fact decreased."

Since publication one of the authors has tried to explain that they were really just being ironic -- and they don't actually believe in so-called 'global cooling.' But the book is so rife with scientific errors (as Joe Romm explains in great detail) that their 'irony' just isn't a valid excuse.

Borenstein points to a better explanation from a climate scientist at the DOE's Lawrence Livermore Labs, who said it was "'a concerted strategy to obfuscate and generate confusion in the minds of the public and policymakers' ahead of international climate talks in December in Copenhagen."

Good thing that reporters like Seth Borenstein are still doing their job and actually reporting on the science. The last thing we need before Copenhagen is more media misinformation.