Posts tagged with 'Sustain'
Weekly Mulch: Climate Change On Obama’s Back Burner
Filed under: 
By Sarah Laskow, Media Consortium Blogger
In his first State of the Union address, President Barack Obama touched on climate issues only briefly. He called on the Senate to pass a climate bill, but did not give Congress a deadline or promise to veto weak legislation. Nor did he mention the Copenhagen climate conference, where international negotiators struggled to produce an agreement on limiting global carbon emissions.
The Obama administration’s attitude towards climate change still represents a remarkable shift from the Bush years, when global warming was treated as little more than a fairy tale. But in the past year, Congressional squabbling has stalled climate legislation, and international negotiators nearly gridlocked in talks over carbon admissions at the multinational Copenhagen conference. Without strong leadership from the president, work to prevent this looming environmental crisis will stall. (more…)
Weekly Mulch: EPA, Clean Air Act Facing Opposition
By Sarah Laskow, Media Consortium Blogger
Climate change legislation is off the table for now, but the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is still working to regulate greenhouse gasses. The organization is up against strong opposition from Republicans and some Democrats. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) is heading the charge, with the assistance of Bush-era EPA officials, now lobbyists with clients in the energy industry.
The EPA and the Clean Air Act
In April 2009, the EPA found that carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gasses pose a hazard to public health. This finding obligated the EPA to regulate these pollutants under the Clean Air Act, a responsibility the Bush administration fought to avoid. The power the agency now has to limit carbon emissions extends far beyond its usual scope, and the EPA’s decisions will have a lasting impact on environmental regulation in this country. As the agency moves to act, everyone from Sen. Murkowski to the state of California is protesting the changes. Kate Sheppard of Mother Jones reports:
“The California Energy Commission last month sent a letter to the EPA asking it to slow down on implementation of regulations on greenhouse gas emissions….The CEC argues that phasing them in too fast could hurt efforts in the state to expand use of low-carbon energy.”
Opponents in Congress are taking action to shut down the EPA’s attempts to curb greenhouse gasses, Sheppard writes. Both Sen. Murkowski and Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-ND) have filed bills that would delay or stop the EPA’s regulatory process.
Attempting to ‘gut the Clean Air Act’
Grist’s Miles Grant is also keeping a close watch on opponents of the regulation.
“At first it seemed like simply one bad idea from Sen. Lisa Murkowski,” he writes. “But now we know the real story—a tangled web of public officials, polluter lobbyists, and efforts to gut the Clean Air Act.”
It emerged this week that Murkowski had help in drafting her bill from EPA administrators from the Bush administration, as first reported by the Washington Post. These former officials now work in Washington as lobbyists and represent clients like Duke Energy and the Alliance of Food Associations on climate change matters.
“Every day it seems we’re learning more,” says Miles. “More about the revolving door between the Bush administration and polluter lobbyists; more about their influence with senators and their staffers; and more about who’s really pulling the strings on efforts to block climate action—Big Oil’s MVP, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK).”
Even the American Farm Bureau Federation…
Another opponent, as Care2 notes, is the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), the country’s largest farm group. The organization approved a special resolution during its four-day convention on Sunday. The resolution supports legislation like Murkowski’s or Pomeroy’s that would “suspend the EPA’s authority to regulator greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.”
During a speech, AFBF president Bob Stallman said that American farmers and ranchers “must aggressively respond to extremists” and “misguided, activist-driven regulation.”
“The days of their elitist power grabs are over,” he said.
More opportunities to improve climate policy
The EPA’s new power is not the only opportunity that the Obama administration has to improve U.S. climate policy. David Roberts, also reporting for Grist, writes about $2.3 billion in new tax credits for clean energy manufacturing companies, announced last Friday.
“There were 183 projects selected out of some 500 applications; one-third were from small businesses; around 30% are expected to be completed this year. The winners are spread across 43 states,” Roberts reports.
Roberts calls it “better than usual industrial policy.” The credits are meant to give a boost to the new green energy economy.
But Roberts warns, “It’s also absurd that clean energy industries still depend on capricious, short-term extensions of tax credits. … Obama has called on Congress to cough up $5 billion a year for these credits, but how enduring will yearly appropriations be the next time Congress changes hands?”
Iowa and the biodiesel tax credit
The answer likely depends on how much support these projects get from the representatives of states that will benefit from the tax credits. In Iowa, for instance, the state’s three Democratic Representatives have asked the House leadership to prioritized a 2010 renewal of the biodiesel tax credit, as Lynda Waddington reports for the Iowa Independent.
“If members of the U.S. Senate do not act on last year’s program extension, however, it might be a moot point,” Waddington writes. The renewal has gotten stalled in the Senate, where both Iowa Senators are blaming the opposite party for delays.
From policy to people
When politicians jockey over regulations and renewals, climate change work in Washington can seem very abstract. But people like John Henrikson, a forester who’s committed to farming 150 acres of trees in sustainable ways, help ground lofty policy ideas down in reality.
“Henrikson’s approach embodies a new way of thinking about our relationship with forests. For years he has been processing his own trees into trim and molding, sold through a broad network of local businesses,” reports Ian Hanna for Yes! Magazine. “Five years ago he got his forest certified to Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) standards, a global system for eco-labeling sustainably managed forests and the products derived from them. And, most recently, he’s developed a project to sell rights to the carbon sequestered on his property.”
Without strong policy coming out Washington, it’s harder for entrepreneurs like Henrikson to make green business a reality. If legislators like Sen. Murkowski and groups like the AFBF don’t block them, the EPA’s new rules are going to begin coming out in March. There’s a major action to combat global warming that the U.S. can take before then, though—for example, we could officially commit to our promise to reduce emissions 17% from 2005 levels by 2020. The deadline for registering climate pledges under the new Copenhagen Accord is the end of this month.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment by members of The Media Consortium. It is free to reprint. Visit the Mulch for a complete list of articles on environmental issues, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health care and immigration issues, check out The Audit, The Pulse, and The Diaspora. This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of leading independent media outlets.
Weekly Mulch: Climate Reform’s Good, Bad, and Ugly
By Sarah Laskow, Media Consortium Blogger
The next United Nations climate change conference is almost a year away, and health care is still dominating the legislative agenda in Washington. That means climate reform opponents, from the coal industry to the global warming skeptics, have plenty of time to work, out of the spotlight, to derail progress. Here’s a glimpse of the enemies of reform—and the companies and individuals that are still fighting for change in 2010.
Take the case of Cape Wind, an offshore wind farm planned for Massachusetts’ Nantucket Sound, as an example. The project faced yet another roadblock this week, when the National Park Service said the site could be listed as a historical place, prized by Nantucket’s Native American tribes. But as Kate Sheppard writes in Mother Jones, the park service’s decision counts as a victory for a less sympathetic opponent as well. William Koch is the founder and president of the Oxbow Group, a privately-held group of companies, and he has laid out more than a million dollars to fight Cape Wind. (more…)
Weekly Mulch: Companies Ditch Chamber for Climate Bill
By Raquel Brown, Media Consortium Blogger
Major utility corporations, like Exelon, California’s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PG&E) and New Mexico’s PNM have announced that they are leaving the U.S. Chamber of Commerce because of the organization’s controversial stance toward climate change and opposition to a clean energy bill. The Chamber represents business interests, and according to a New York Times editorial, “no organization has done more to undermine [climate change] legislation.” (more…)
Weekly Mulch: Solar Power Flares Up
By Raquel Brown, TMC Mediawire Blogger
For a long time, only the economic elite could afford the hefty cost of solar energy. But in recent years, creative and affordable solar power technologies have been developed, creating a truly viable fossil fuel alternative.
Arla Shephard of High Country News reports that timber companies in Washington’s Kittitas County are looking to renewable energy to keep their companies out of debt. American Forest Land Company is planning to create the largest solar power plant in the Northwest. The Teanaway Solar Reserve would use 400,000 photovoltaic panels and produce 76 megawatts. That’s enough energy to power 45,000 homes.
There are economic benefits as well. “In economically depressed Kittitas County (where the unemployment rate hovers at 8.1 percent), Teanaway’s project will mean a couple hundred temporary construction jobs and around 35 permanent jobs at the power plant, and potentially hundreds more long-term jobs at the manufacturing plant,” says Shephard.
Similar plans are also underway in New Mexico. Matthew Reichbach of the New Mexico Independent notes that a solar plant will be built in the Elephant Butte area and will hopefully bring clean energy and jobs to the community, while also saving water.
What if we replaced paved asphalt surfaces with solar panels? Solar Road Panels are an avant-garde clean-energy idea that could provide three times the electricity the U.S. consumes without emitting any carbon. Grist’s David Roberts explains that the Solar Road Panels would also contain LED lighting to help communicate with drivers, heating units to prevent icing and other weather conditions, electric vehicle recharging stations and high-voltage power transmission lines. The Department of Transportation has warmed up to the idea, and given Solar Roadways a $100,000 contract to build a prototype. According to the Solar Roadways website,
The Solar Road Panels will contain embedded LEDs which “paint” the road lines from beneath to provide safer nighttime driving, as well as to give up to the minute instructions (via the road) to drivers (i.e.) ‘detour ahead’). The road will be able to sense wildlife on the road and can warn drivers to ’slow down.’ There will also be embedded heating elements in the surface to prevent snow and ice buildup, providing for safer winter driving. This feature packed system will become an intelligent highway that will double as a secure, intelligent, decentralized, self-healing power grid which will enable a gradual weaning from fossil fuels.”
While there are many costs to solarizing the roads, Roberts points out that the cost of manufacturing Solar Road Panels matches our current costs to maintain power plants, asphalt roads and grid infrastructure.
Going solar is becoming less expensive and more convenient. Forget the traditional, bulky, hard-to-install panels made out of crystalline silicon. Instead, solar energy companies have developed thin-film technology to create photovoltaic (PV) cells. The process, which uses non-silicon alternatives like copper, selenium, indium and gallium, has been compared to how the Federal Reserve prints money. Scott Thill of Alternet notes that this new solar technology will revolutionize the clean energy market and can be used on everything from a house to a car.
Finally, this past Sunday, Grind for the Green hosted the second annual solar-powered hip-hop show in San Francisco. Kristia Castrillo of WireTap Magazine explains that while the event is highly innovative, “We cannot meekly nod our heads to the folks who are already doing this work.” Solar power is just one part of the equation. We must continue to develop a relevant dialogue, explore new ideas and work to engage the public in creating a sustainable environment.
“In truth, the task of sustaining human life on this planet does not rely on our physical strength or the numbers in our bank balance, rather it depends on our ability to step out of our comfort zone,” says Castrillo.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment and is free to reprint. Visit Sustain.NewsLadder.net for a complete list of articles on the environment and sustainability, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health, and immigration issues, check out Economy.NewsLadder.net, Healthcare.NewsLadder.net and Immigration.newsladder.net.
This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of 50 leading independent media outlets, and was created by NewsLadder
Weekly Mulch: Throwing the Environment Away
By Raquel Brown, TMC MediaWire Blogger
Our throwaway economy is largely to blame for our environmental woes, as Lester Brown points out for Grist. First introduced after World War II to stimulate growth and create more jobs, throwaway products offered consumers convenience. Soon, disposable paper towels replaced hand towels, tissues replaced handkerchiefs, and plastic diapers replaced cloth ones, eventually building up an overwhelming amount of garbage. Throwaway products create a multitude of problems, including maxed-out landfills, air pollution and depletion of limited resources. Instead of hunting for new places to stash our trash, we should focus on consuming less altogether. But in the midst of an economic crisis, can we transition to a sustainable economy?
“The overriding challenge for our generation is to build a new economy—one that is powered largely by renewable sources of energy, that has a much more diversified transport system, and that reuses and recycles everything,” writes Brown.
Materialism is part of our culture, alongside baseball, hamburgers and free speech. It won’t be easy for Americans to break their consumption habits. According to Wiretap, Americans use more paper and create more waste than any other country. The video below, The Secret Life of Paper, explains how paper contributes to global warming, how to reduce paper waste, and the environmental and economic benefits of recycling.
Meanwhile, Tracey Bianchi of Sojourners remains optimistic that the next generation will grow up to be more environmentally conscious. Bianchi’s young son referred to an empty water bottle on the ground as “recycling” rather than trash. To the younger generation, protecting the environment is not an adjustment but a normal way of life.
“Small things like this give me hope. They make me think that indeed, we can change things. And they make me nervous for the day when my son is old enough to demand an excuse as to why my generation lived like sloppy gluttons. The way I demand my parents account for the racism of the ’50s, the way my parents demanded their parents account for two world wars, the way that generation demanded an explanation for slavery,” writes Bianchi.
Although most people are familiar with the 3 Rs of conservation (reduce, reuse, recycle), Public News Service’s Dick Layman notes that “there is more to recycling than meets the eye.” Many other green cycles reduce waste. Pre-cycling refers to not buying things you don’t need; free-cycling is giving things away instead of disposing of them; up-cycling is when useful items are created from recycled materials; down-cycling is when you reuse an item for a less important function and e-cycling is when you recycle electronics.
But perhaps the biggest environmental culprit in our throwaway economy is bottled water. The Michigan Messenger’s Eartha Jane Melzer reports that bottled water sales for the Nestle corporation are thankfully on the decline. Even a small slip in consumption can make a big difference: A whopping 70% of consumers say they drink bottled water, according to a study conducted by Mintel. What kind of environmental impact does bottled water have? According to Food & Water Watch, it takes over 17 million barrels of oil (which is enough to fuel 1 million cars for a year) to produce all of the plastic water bottles sold in the United States each year. And, even worse, about 86% of the bottles end up in the trash instead of recycling.
Despite these grim statistics, America’s top water importer, Fiji, has remained immune to environmental criticism. Anna Lenzer of Mother Jones questions how Fiji Water embodies chic and green ideals, but is backed by a military dictatorship who can’t provide its own people with clean water. For more information about Fiji Water’s troubles, check out Mother Jones‘ special report, Spin the Bottle.
Immediate action is necessary to combat climate change, and there are many small things that we can do to reduce our waste, such as paying bills online. More people today use re-usable grocery bags instead of plastic or paper ones, buy eco-friendly products and use recycling when given the option. And even though the next generation is being taught to be less wasteful, that is no excuse for a wasteful lifestyle today. We have to lead by example and create a responsible economy to go hand in hand with a sustainable environment.
Finally, we’d like to recognize Senator Ted Kennedy’s (D-Mass.) accomplishments for the environment. He fought for energy efficiency standards, land and ocean preservation, pollution reduction, and oil company accountability. And while many are concerned about the impact of Kennedy’s death on healthcare reform, Jonathan Hiskes of Grist worries how his passing will affect climate change legislation. As a strong advocate for the environment, Kennedy’s vote was crucial to pass a climate bill in the Senate, and his support and vision will surely be missed.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment and is free to reprint. Visit Sustain.NewsLadder.net for a complete list of articles on the environment and sustainability, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health, and immigration issues, check out Economy.NewsLadder.net, Healthcare.NewsLadder.net and Immigration.newsladder.net.
This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of 50 leading independent media outlets, and was created by NewsLadder.
Weekly Mulch: Why Diplomacy is Key to Fighting Climate Change
by Raquel Brown, TMC MediaWire Blogger
International climate negotiations are currently bogged down in smog. Many countries are in disagreement about the best way to go about reducing emissions and curbing climate change. Some, like the U.S. and Great Britain, are working together to cut carbon emissions; while others say it’s their way or the highway. Until the air clears, it will be difficult to determine which global leaders are making the most effective choices—or even what the best path to a cleaner earth will be.
On Tuesday, the world’s two leading polluters, the United States and China, finally signed a “memorandum of understanding” and pledged to work together to create a global solution to arrest climate change by December’s United Nations summit in Copenhagen, as Stephen Robert Morse reports for Mother Jones. The two countries have long disagreed on the best way to control climate change and used each other as an excuse for inaction. Disagreements have centered around which country should pay for clean-ups and new technologies.
As Agence Grance-Presse emphasizes in Grist, China and other developing nations have argued that they shouldn’t have to cut their emissions, as the bulk of pollution comes from industrialized countries. Developing countries do not have the means to finance a more energy efficient economy and many argue that the U.S. should take a leadership role and help them.
India made a similar point when Secretary of State Hilary Clinton visited last week. India’s environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, was remarkably candid when he told her that India would not succumb to international pressures to set targets on emissions. After all, as Barbara Crossette points out for The Nation, developing countries shouldn’t have to clean up after rich countries’ negligence. Although India has a strong economy and is one of the world’s largest polluters, their rising population keeps per capita emissions lower than other developed nations.
Yet, actions speak louder than words. Going back to Grist, Grance-Presse notes that despite China’s non-committal stance, it has made significant strides in wind and solar power. Their next step towards improved energy efficiency should be reducing its coal-dependency, which accounts for 85 percent of its carbon emissions. However, as global temperatures continue to rise, it’s clear that active collaboration between industrialized and developing nations is necessary to meaningfully tackle climate change.
Much like China, India has made gains towards renewable energy. At a conference organized by a OneWorld.net sister organization in India last week, Special Envoy to the Prime Minister on Climate Change, Shram Saran, explained that India will do “Whatever we can within the limitations of our resources.” The country is exploring investments in solar, hydro, biomass and wind power. Some specific strategies are to replace incandescent with energy-saving flurescent bulbs, and to go “local” among Indian communities and farmers with a “people-centric” environmental campaign.
OneWorld reports that “This project intends to link grassroots communities, development practitioners, academia and policymakers with a view to encourage them to forge new partnerships with the government, domain experts, and community-based organizations working with vulnerable sections of society.”
Great Britain’s innovative solution to climate change is the “clean energy cash back” program. According to Chelsea Green’s Paul Gipe, the program features feed-in tariffs for Combined Heat & Power (CHP), small solar PV systems on new homes and a tariff for existing homes. What distinguishes this from other tariffs are the added incentives: if a homeowner reduces their own consumption, they can sell the surplus electricity to the grid, and receive an additional paid bonus in return.
“The proposed program, like the successful programs it was modeled after, was designed to ‘set tariffs at a level to encourage investment in small scale low carbon generation.’ This is in contrast to faux feed-in tariffs that set the tariffs on the ‘value’ of renewable energy to the system as in the California Public Utility Commission’s largely ineffective program,” says Gipe.
Britain was the first to set legally binding carbon budgets when they passed Britain’s Climate Change Act last year. This low carbon policy aims to transform Britain’s economy and has a realistic shot at reaching the country’s renewable energy and carbon targets.
Meanwhile, how does the U.S. measure up? The Nation has an excellent overview of the current status and future of the climate bill. In this interview, the Washington Post’s Juliet Eilperin says that farming and manufacturing interests will be one of the key battles in passing climate change legislation through the Senate. The future of the Senate bill is also contingent on the outcome of international negotiations in Copenhagen. And although the ACES bill does not meet the requirements scientists believe are necessary to curb climate change, Eilperin remains optimistic that the bill sets up a valuable platform for successful legislation in the future, much like the Clean Air Act.
The U.S. appeared hypocritical when they urged other nations to reduce their carbon emissions and commit to climate change when they themselves haven’t made strides. Rather than lead by example, Republicans like Michael Rogers (R-MI) opposed the U.S. climate change bill because the bill will “eliminate our middle class and send it to China and India,” as Osha Gray Davidson reports for Mother Jones. Some argue that a U.S. effort to cut carbon emissions will put America at an economic disadvantage if China and India do not take similar steps.
In other news, The Washington Monthly’s Steve Benen reports on global warming skeptic James Inhofe’s (R-Okla) shocking claim that burning oil doesn’t cause pollution. Really?! I thought we were past all that nonsense.
But there are pervasive problems on the home front too. As climate legislation dawdles in the Senate, few have considered how climate change will impact marginalized communities. In an article for In These Times, Michelle Chen highlights how global warming widens the climate gap and exacerbates social and racial inequalities:
“The reality is, poor people always lived in the most environmentally vulnerable places – places that were vulnerable before the climate change problem made them worse. The real problem in this country is we haven’t had a real serious discussion about the social equity issues connected to climate and environment. Sadly, too many people aren’t inclined to engage in that discussion,” said Elliot Sclar in an interview with Chen. Sclar is the director of the Center for Sustainable Urban Development at Columbia University.
As the world tries to break the stalemate over how to reverse climate change, it is ambiguous whether the U.S. has encouraged any collective progress. While our government has taken small steps toward investments in alternative energy, other nations have leapt ahead in their commitment towards a sustainable environment.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment. Visit Sustain.NewsLadder.net for a complete list of articles on the environment and sustainability, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health, and immigration issues, check out Economy.NewsLadder.net, Healthcare.NewsLadder.net and Immigration.newsladder.net.
This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of 50 leading independent media outlets, and was created by NewsLadder.
Weekly Mulch: The Pros and Cons of the Climate Bill
by Raquel Brown, TMC MediaWire Blogger
The American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), also known as the Waxman-Markey bill, narrowly passed in the U.S. House of Representatives at the end of June. The ACES bill seeks to mitigate climate change via emission reductions, investments in energy technology, creation of clean energy jobs, and rigid standards for energy efficiency. Check out Grist for a valuable breakdown of the act.
ACES is far from perfect and required many concessions to pass. But did lawmakers compromise too much? The climate bill is getting mixed reactions: Proponents feel that ACES holds historical and environmental significance as the first legislation designed to combat global warming, whereas critics think the bill is little more than a “massive energy tax.”
Businesses dislike the bill’s stringent greenhouse gas regulations, but many environmentalists are concerned that the bill is too watered down. As Dara Colwell writes for AlterNet, the carbon offsets proposed in the ACES bill are largely unsuccessful in other countries. The European Union instituted a similar program five years ago, and according to the Wall Street Journal, European emissions actually grew 1 per cent each year under the program. A straight carbon tax, rather than cap-and-trade, would yield more positive results, increasing transparency and helping us taper off coal.
And what do right wing skeptics have to say about all this hoopla? As Grist’s Kate Sheppard reports, Republicans were highly critical of the bill, denouncing its ability to spur any economic growth. Remember Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla), who famously called global warming “the greatest hoax perpetuated on mankind?” Meanwhile, Democrats have praised the bill’s economic potential.
Focusing on the bigger picture, Colin Beavan at Yes! Magazine argues that ACES’ flaws are worth overlooking. As one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases, the U.S. needs to set an example by committing to fight climate change. Failing to do so before December’s U.N. conference in Copenhagen would be an unwise political move. Additionally, the ACES bill is the last opportunity to pass any climate or energy legislation before 2010’s midterm elections.
As ACES moves to the Senate, legislators are grappling with the bill’s many imperfections. According to Aaron Wiener of The Washington Independent, Democrats are prepared to strengthen the bill’s provisions as they push the legislation forward, but many Republicans argue that the bill won’t survive because of the current economic crisis.
Even though many felt the final bill leaves something to be desired, ACES does include key equity provisions, thanks to Green For All’s (GFA) campaigning. As GFA Youth Organizer Julia H. Rhee writes for RaceWire:
With over 3.8 million youth, ages 18-24, neither in school or jobs, it’s clear we have to provide better opportunities to engage our young people. Particularly for youth of color who have been locked out of the education process and won’t follow a traditional 4-year college path, we need viable alternatives to the streets. We need to scale up healthy, career-track jobs that will allow our youth to advance and not be left behind.
This provision will mean that as green job contracts come down the pipe, quality standards will ensure they are good jobs, and local hiring practices will make them available to low-income local communities.
This post features links to the best independent, progressive reporting about the environment. Visit Sustain.NewsLadder.net for a complete list of articles on the environment and sustainability, or follow us on Twitter. And for the best progressive reporting on critical economy, health, and immigration issues, check out Economy.NewsLadder.net, Healthcare.NewsLadder.net and Immigration.newsladder.net, This is a project of The Media Consortium, a network of 50 leading independent media outlets, and was created by NewsLadder.