Posts with the tag Global Warming

Climate Bill Passed in Energy and Commerce Committee

Tommaso — Fri, 22 May 2009 15:17:49 EDT

For the first time EVER, a climate bill made it out of a congressional committee yesterday and is heading to a full House vote. Unfortunately the American Clean Energy and Security Act was badly weakened in the process, to the point that some of the most principled environmental organizations are opposing it. At Campus Progress we are still hopeful that it will be strengthened on its way to the President's desk, but it won't happen without your continued engagement.

It is still early to declare victory, but take some time to celebrate for this historic occasion. This could not have happened without all of you who took action in your communities. From PowerVote to PowerShift, from organizing town halls during the recess to clocking in thousands of phone calls from constituents, we managed to turn two 'Expected No' votes into yesses. Now let's keep this up and make sure that the final bill will be a much stronger, bolder and more just one.

Check out the Funding our Future blog for news about the bill's progress, resources and action opportunities and tell everyone you know that our climate legislation will be hijacked by King Coal if we don't step up to protect it.

Students take action on climate change

canow.environment — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:54:16 EST

"All across the world, in every kind of environment and region known to man, increasingly dangerous weather patterns and devastating storms are abruptly putting an end to the long-running debate over whether or not climate change is real. Not only is it real, it's here, and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new global phenomenon: the man-made natural disaster."

BARACK OBAMA, speech, Apr. 3, 2006

Students in Universities across the country (and world), are working for change. Many have realized that if we do not change our ways now, we will pay life-threatening consequences in the future.

I wanted to highlight the current waves of "activism in academia" because the two really go hand in hand. Learning about and becoming more aware of environmental issues ignites passion. The following sustainability digest was posted by the Chancellor's Advisory Committee on Sustainability at the University of California, Berkeley...please read on and share with others.

Price of Gas and the NetRoots

Tommaso — Thu, 22 May 2008 09:30:34 EDT

Good readings on the current oil crisis:

When Big Corporations Do Good Things

Tommaso — Fri, 16 May 2008 10:58:49 EDT

One of the least reported but most important stories of this congress is their failure to renew the Renewable Energy Tax incentives necessary for industries such as wind, solar and geothermal to compete with the heavily subsidized death fuels (nuclear, oil, coal and natural gas). With the threato of a Bush veto and the inability to get enough votes to avoid a filibuster, the slim Democrat majority found itself in a stand-still.

Behind the heavy Republican opposition stand many of the big energy firms, from Big Oil, to large Utilities, desperately swimming against the current in order to maintain their profits in a rapidly warming world.

There is one corporation that is fighting back, and it shows a great example of how Market Capitalism can be regulated to make sure that Big Companies do Good Things.

Burning the Future on Film

Tommaso — Wed, 14 May 2008 16:23:12 EDT

If you've been paying any attention to the Presidential primaries, you must have seen the cheerful and hope-ful ads of Americans from Balanced Energy Choices (ABEC) and the new-name-same-story American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity. In these ads you see decent, diverse, hard-working blue collar Americans talking about the solution to all our problems:

CLEAN COAL

Unfortunately, what these people aren't telling you is that burning coal = Burning The Future.

Nuclear Solution

Tommaso — Thu, 01 May 2008 11:43:48 EDT

I recently blogged about my perceived solution to climate change and my criticism of nuclear and coal solutions. Some people replied aggressively saying that Nuclear is 'safe and cheap' and calling me shortsighted.

I would like to share a couple of articles about nuclear energy that I read recently.

I Love Bikes Part I

Tommaso — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:19:02 EDT

Most development experts will tell you that clean water scarcity is one of the greatest obstacles to lifting people out of poverty.

Check out this video from the winning entry of the "Innovate or Die" competition to develop a pedal powered device which has a positive impact on the environment.

http://www.cargocycling.org/

Even though this isn't goint go solve the problem on its own, might not be practical or affordable or a believable solution (I really don't know enough about the product or the issue to judge), what I love about this is that it shows our potential to innovate sustainably.

More fun bike stuff here.

Iraqi Oil Wells burn the planet!

Tommaso — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:12:28 EDT

To celebrate the anniversary of our ‘mission accomplished’ in Iraq, here are some of the connections between war and climate.

We Action Team

Asher — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 12:21:21 EDT

I've signed up for the We Campaign because I believe that by working together, we can solve the climate crisis. Will you join me? Just click on the link below to sign up and add your voice to the million-plus call for an end to global warming

www.wecansolveit.org/join

The We Campaign is an effort launched by Al Gore and the Alliance for Climate Protection to promote solutions to the climate crisis. It's an urgent issue, but the climate crisis is also solvable if we work together and unite our leaders around solutions like renewable power and enhanced energy efficiency. We can leave the next generation a healthy climate.

Once you have joined the We campaign, think about creating an account on My Community and join the We Action Team:

http://www.wecansolveit.org/page/group/WeActionTeam

We Can Solve It

Asher — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 12:18:17 EDT

I've signed up for the We Campaign because I believe that by working together, we can solve the climate crisis. Will you join me? Just click on the link below to sign up and add your voice to the million-plus call for an end to global warming

www.wecansolveit.org/join

The We Campaign is an effort launched by Al Gore and the Alliance for Climate Protection to promote solutions to the climate crisis. It's an urgent issue, but the climate crisis is also solvable if we work together and unite our leaders around solutions like renewable power and enhanced energy efficiency. We can leave the next generation a healthy climate. Please add your voice by joining the We Campaign today:

www.wecansolveit.org/join

Teach a person to fish....

Tommaso — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 16:42:45 EDT

Yesterday I went out to Sushi with my progressive co-workers and, as a good environmentalist, I sent them information about which fish are sustainable to eat along with a friendly message about how 90% of our fisheries are depleted. I didn't want to guilt trip, just educate, cause I don't think that people will change their habits because of gloom and doom heckling. Problem is, more I read about our fishy troubles, more I realize what a dire situation we are in and that however we can get people to change their ways, it needs to happen fast.

Selling Environmental Indulgences and Saving the Planet

Ethan — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 13:44:05 EDT

The archaic and medieval practice of selling indulgences whereby sinners were assured that they would escape or evade purgatory was abolished by the Christian church in 1563.

When applied to the practice of selling carbon permits for the purpose of curbing carbon emission, it seems ludicrous. Yes, the environment is not ours to sell. And yes, allowing the indulgence of some but not all does not seem quite the "moral" practice. Although, this conceptual adaptation requires the action of environmentally destructive pollution to be "sinning," which is contentious, but I can accept. Where I do disagree, is in the labeling of the exercise of regulating carbon emission, (through a gradual, innovative and cost-effective method of cap-and-trade) as the allowance, through monetary payment, of monitored "sinning."

Had we allowed any of the seven deadly sins to become this destructive, would we simply dismiss the method of reducing their destructiveness because those of questionable (environmental) moral standing foolishly partisan the environmentalist community? (You can argue for the destructiveness of the other deadly sins if you like, but for the sake of argument, let's assume that the socioeconomic ramifications of climate change will be life-changing, to the point of resource war, mass famine, global instability).

Two "non-indulgent" alternatives:

Voluntary market-mechanisms (VMMs) may propose "win-win" solutions at not cost to the social or economic infrastructure. It may bring previously uninvolved participants onto the environmental platform and it does increase peer influenced decision-making, which isn't always so bad. The major problems, which rule out VMMs as a pragmatic policy decision are:

Foremost, the performance of "least-cost" upgrades. Corporations, Governments, or individuals who participate in these voluntary environmental programs make upgrades based on social status and market benefit. There is not fear of punishment or reparation.

Its ineffective targeting of affected areas does not create any incentive for major carbon-emitters to improve local conditions, leaving local communities to argue it's idiocy.

The other solution, command-and-control regulation, is far less practical in terms of creativity and progressive qualities. Yes command-and-control regulations establish a cap, is quick and effective, relatively unambiguous, and produces stable rule-enforcements. However, the problems should be obvious.

-Command-and-control regulations provide no incentive to advance green technologies, placing all the responsibility on government subsidies and private donors.

-it relies solely on the power of the state and the accuracy of a newly established carbon register.

-It creates new, heedless bureaucracy. Not to mention, it would be very costly.

Ok, so cap-and-trade:

C-and-T would be flexible. It would not conflict with capitalism or conflict with the way the state and global free-market economy have progressed (more appropriate- regressed) over the past decade. It would thrive on capitalism, and as we can already see evolving, create a global competition to develop renewable technologies. It would also install a cap on emissions, the same as command-and-control, but create incentive for polluting institutions to lower their emissions, as to increase profit revenues and punish those to pollute too much. Yes, it would create new bureaucracy, but far less than would be established under command-and-control, and through the punishment polluting institutions and the auction of carbon permits, a new source of revenue would be created. It can also target specific locales more effectively than voluntary market-mechanisms and would allow for marketed PR in specific polluting-institution locations.

I would not consider this to be a purchase and sale of indulgences. If it is the most immediate and economically congruent method to save the planet, don't we have to adopt it?

Seat Belts and Air Bags Not Required Anymore!

N.Raider — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:39:11 EDT

Sounds ridiculous, right? Almost as ridiculous as increasing the amount of zero-emission vehicles in California.

Bush at the WIREC: Mirror, Mirror, On the Wall, Who's In the Most Denial of All?

Kate — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:56:36 EDT

The United States is the only industrialized nation to refuse to sign the Kyoto protocol and has objected to a UN proposal to significantly reduce carbon emissions by the year 2020. The Bush administration has slashed budget funding for renewable energy incentives. And Bush's 2005 Energy Policy Act gave a total of $4.3 billion in tax incentives to oil companies.

Yet, at the March 5th Washington International Renewable Energy Conference, Bush looked the world in the eye and said with a straight face, “America is in the lead when it comes to energy independence; we're in the lead when it comes to new technologies; we're in the lead when it comes to global climate change; and we'll stay that way.”

The Bush administration has refused to come clean about their unwillingness to address the United States' contribution to global warming. Instead, they rely on a campaign of propaganda, false “science,” and now, outright lies. They believe that if they repeat something often enough, the public will simply accept it as truth. And they believe that the American people won't bother to check the facts.

President Bush is undermining our society's commitment to fighting global warming to the world and making us a laughing stock in the international community. And he has made it clear that he has no intention of addressing this impending crisis.

Progressive Future is working to make the United States a true leader in renewable energy. It's simply a matter of being a responsible member of the global community. Show the Bush administration and the world our commitment to fighting global warming by signing our Priorities for a Progressive Future.

Vatican Says Pollution is a Sin

Kayla — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:55:04 EDT

When asked about modern sins, Archbishop Gianfranco Girotti listed pollution as a sinful act.

Girotti, in an interview headlined "New Forms of Social Sin," also listed "ecological" offences as modern evils.
In recent months, Pope Benedict has made several strong appeals for the protection of the environment, saying issues such as climate change had become gravely important for the entire human race.
Under Benedict and his predecessor John Paul, the Vatican has become progressively "green".
It has installed photovoltaic cells on buildings to produce electricity and hosted a scientific conference to discuss the ramifications of global warming and climate change, widely blamed on human use of fossil fuels.

1,500 Campuses Participate in Focus the Nation

pdelatorre — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 14:54:41 EST

Yesterday, thousands of students and faculty members participated in Focus the Nation, and national teach-in on global warming. Check out some excerpts of the media coverage below the fold:

UFOs & Global Warming: Equally Pressing Issues for ’08?

pdelatorre — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:38:20 EST

It’s Getting Hot in Here has a great post on how little global warming has been mentioned in the presidential debates. Apparently, out of 2,769 questions, only 3 were about global warming – the same number as were asked about UFOs.

Personally, I find the priorities of the US media are much more frightening than alien abduction.

EPA Blocks Greenhouse Gas Limits

Kay Steiger — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 13:22:13 EST

Some infuriating reporting reveals the the Environmental Protection Agency is actually blocking automobile emissions standards by California and 16 other states. This just goes to show that even though the United States signed onto the Bali pact last week, agreeing to reduce emissions by 2012, that commitment isn't backed up in any real way by this administration. These states are willing to put forth enforcement on their own, but for the first time the EPA -- the part of the government designed to protect the environment -- blocked an initiative in conflict with the Clean Air Act.

Those lobbying against the initiative, primarily automakers, are thrilled. They say it would be "too difficult" to adhere to different standards in different states. Perhaps then they should just meet the lowest emissions standard and sell those in the rest of the states as well.

Environment: Not on the Agenda

Kay Steiger — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:16:06 EST

I thought this from Dave Roberts over at Grist was pretty interesting:

[According to] Gene Karpinski of the League of Conservation Voters: as of mid-November, Tim Russert of Meet the Press had interviewed presidential candidates 16 times, asking nearly 300 questions, and had not mentioned "climate change" or "global warming" a single time.

Staggering.

Energy Bill: We are killing a lot more than just time

Jamie Friedman — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:14:32 EST

Due to political gridlock in Congress over provisions in the Energy Bill, it now seems that Senate and House reps are so scared of not passing a bill that they are again (as they did with ENDA) at risk of passing a less than mediocre piece of legislation.