Green on HuffingtonPost.com

David Barr's Antarctica: Leopard Seal, Elephant Seal and Penguins (PHOTOS)

2009-11-22T15:52:59Z

David Barr specializes in taking photographs underwater and in Antarctica.

From taking photos of dangerous leopard seals underwater to the whole fields filled with penguins, Barr seeks adventure with the use of his photographic lens.

Check out these incredible shots of Barr's time in Antarctica! Don't forget to vote for your very favorite.

All photos are copyright David Barr. For more amazing photography from David Barr, click here.

Get HuffPost Green On Facebook and Twitter!

Al Gore On "Saturday Night Live:" "I'm Just Going To Start Acting Crazy"

2009-11-22T15:36:09Z

This week on Saturday Night Live, Al Gore appeared with Seth Meyers on Weekend Update for a hilarious segment for NBC's Green Week. He announces that he's come up with a new tactic for getting people to care about green issues, which is to start acting crazy. One idea he has is to tape toy guns to trees so politicians know that the forest is coming to get them.

WATCH:

Get HuffPost Green On Facebook and Twitter!

Sacramento Fisherman Arrested In Sea Lion Shooting

2009-11-22T07:39:13Z

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Authorities arrested a Sacramento fisherman Saturday in connection to shooting a sea lion in the head.

California game wardens said they arrested Larry Allen Legans, 43, on misdemeanor charges of animal cruelty, negligent discharge of a firearm, and take of a marine mammal. Legans told authorities he grew tired of competing with the protected animals so he fired his 12-gauge shotgun at the sea lion, injuring the creature.

"He said he was tired of watching sea lions take his fish," said Warden Patrick Foy.

About a half-dozen sea lions have started to spend time farther up the Sacramento River, competing with anglers for fish as far inland as Rio Vista, just southwest of Sacramento.

An injured sea lion was first spotted on a dock in Sacramento on Nov. 12 with a wound near its right eye. A witness told authorities Legans fired on the sea lion a day earlier when it surfaced in the river near Verona.

Authorities arrested Legans at his home Saturday morning after the witness reported the suspect's license plate number to them. They recovered a shotgun from Legans' home during the arrest.

Foy said Legans has since admitted to the shooting. He allegedly told a fisherman in another boat that he "may not want to watch this," before loading the shotgun.

The animal has not been spotted since Nov. 12, but officials expect it to survive because sea lions tend to have thick skulls. Sea lions are protected by the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act.

There was no telephone number listed for Legans.

Andrew Kimbrell: New Report: GMOs Causing Massive Pesticide Pollution

2009-11-21T22:50:28Z

There is one fact about genetically engineered foods that there is no debate about: no one wakes up in the morning eager to buy gene-altered food. There's good reason for this. Genetically modified foods do nothing for the "eating public". They provide no extra nutrition, flavor, safety or any other trait that people actually want. Instead, these food products only offer risks, which include potential toxicity, allergenecity, and lower nutritional value.

This presents a tough problem for the Monsantos of the world, who are pushing these GM foods. How can you sell something to the public that offers no benefits to them? And, because of their lobbying power, the biotech companies have ensured that their products are not labeled. So Monsanto's real request of the public is "be unknowing guinea pigs for foods that make us a lot of money and offer you nothing but risk."

Obviously this message is a PR nightmare, so Monsanto has come up with a spin that is old as public relations itself: "accept and buy our products because they will help the world." More particularly, their ads displayed in mass transit systems around the country and regularly on NPR claim that GM foods "will feed a hungry world" and "reduce the load of pesticides" used in agriculture.

Not surprisingly, both these claims turn out to be self-serving myths. Earlier this year the Union of Concerned Scientists issued a detailed report entitled "Failure to Yield". The report's findings were straightforward and incontrovertible. After 21 years of research, billions of dollars of investments in public and private funds, and more than 13 years of commercialization, GM crops have done nothing to significantly increase yield: so much for the "feeding the world's hungry" spin.

Now, a new report from The Organic Center, "Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use: The First Thirteen Years", exposes the "less pesticide" myth. The report, which was released on Tuesday, was authored by Dr. Charles Benbrook, a leading agricultural scientist. In the spirit of full disclosure, I should also mention that Center for Food Safety helped fund the report.

It turns out that far from reducing pesticides, GM crops are a major reason for the massive expansion of pesticide use in recent years. This should not be a surprise. The majority of GE crops are "Roundup Ready," designed to survive heavy and repeated spraying with Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller. Roundup Ready crops have dramatically increased Roundup use, and spawned a growing epidemic of Roundup-resistant weeds, which now infest millions of acres of American cropland. Killing resistant weeds requires more herbicides. How much more? Dr. Benbrook's study - based on official USDA data - shows that GE crops have increased the overall use of weedkillers in the U.S. by a massive 383 million pounds since 1996.

Sometimes even more chemicals won't do the trick. In the South, cotton farmers are reverting to the pre-industrial practice of "chopping cotton," or manual hoeing, to rid their fields of Roundup-resistant pigweed.

Never fear, the biotech industry has "killer" solutions to the Roundup-resistant weed epidemic - you guessed it, new crops resistant to different and multiple herbicides. Dr. Benbrook describes these "next-generation" GE crops, which are the true pesticide-promoting future of agricultural biotechnology.

For instance, Dow Agrosciences will soon bring us GE corn, resistant to 2,4-D, one of the weedkillers in Agent Orange - the dioxin-laced defoliant used during the Vietnam War. 2,4-D-resistant corn will undoubtedly increase use of this dangerous weedkiller, which has been banned in Sweden, Norway and Denmark due to its links to cancer and reproductive disorders. Monsanto, DuPont, Bayer and Syngenta all have their own new "herbicide-tolerant" crops in the works, some resistant to two and even three herbicides each. The inevitable result will be continuing increases in the use of toxic chemicals to kill "next-generation" weeds resistant to multiple weedkillers.

In the face of all this, many farmers are becoming disillusioned with GE crops. In many states, demand for conventional seed, especially soybeans, is outstripping supply. Among the reasons given by farmers for this historic switch are dramatic price hikes for biotech seeds, increased pesticide costs due to resistant weeds, premiums for non-GM supplies, and importantly, the ability to save and replant conventional seeds, which is illegal with Monsanto's patented GE seeds.

Thanks then to the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Organic Center for debunking the myths about GM crops and foods. In terms of timing, the two reports released this year couldn't have come at a more crucial moment. Through careful scientific analysis they expose the false advertising that biotechnology companies are using in print and on our public radio airways.

We should all know what Monsanto and other companies are selling, and its not a solution to world hunger or a cleanser for the environment. What they are really selling is what they make best: chemicals. The biotech giants - Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta, Bayer and Dow - are, without exception, major pesticide manufacturers. They have each bought up sizeable chunks of the world's seed supply, and are using biotechnology to make those seeds sell their pesticides for them.

It may be good for their bottom line, but its bad for us, the safety of our food, and the health of our environment.

Brendan DeMelle: Climategate in Perspective, Featuring Isaac Newton

2009-11-21T22:25:12Z

Climate conspriricists pounced at the opportunity yesterday to draw grandiose conclusions from the illegal hacking of private emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit.

They wasted no time declaring global warming a vast science-wing conspiracy, orchestrated by a powerful handful of white-coats who, when not publishing in reputable peer-reviewed science journals, were (gasp) emailing each other to talk shop and vent about climate skeptic “idiots” (how un-PC).

The scandalistas say little about the fact that this breach of security and publishing of private communications is a crime, content to enjoy the opportunity to cherry-pick a few lines from these internal emails to push the skeptic theory of a sinister master plan by mainstream scientists to warn humanity that man has altered the climate in dangerous ways.

The Telegraph’s resident skeptic blogger, James Dellingpole, immediately labeled this episode “Climategate,” pondering whether this is “the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming.’”

If James Dellingpole lived in Newton’s day, his blog (er, scroll) might have read something like this.

And here are some of the “tasters” Sir Dellingpole might have pulled from Isaac Newton’s personal communications [H/T CarbonFixated]:

Conspiring to avoid public scrutiny:

There is nothing which I desire to avoid in matters of philosophy more then contentions, nor any kind of contention more then one in print: & therefore I gladly embrace your proposal of a private correspondence. What’s done before many witnesses is seldom without some further concern then that for truth: but what passes between friends in private usually deserve ye name of consultation rather then contest, & so I hope it will prove between you & me.

Newton to Hooke, 5 February 1676

Insulting dissenting scientists and equating them with holocaust deniers:

[Hooks Considerations] consist in ascribing an hypothesis to me which is not mine; in asserting an hypothesis which as to ye principal parts of it is not against me; in granting the greatest part of my discourse if explicated by that hypothesis; & in denying some things the truth of which would have appeared by an experimental examination.

Newton to Oldenburg, 11 June 1672

Manipulation of evidence:

I wrote to you on Tuesday that the last leafe of the papers you sent me should be altered because it refers to a manuscript in my private custody & not yet upon record.

Newton to Keill, May 15 1674

Knowingly publishing scientific fraud:

You need not give yourself the trouble of examining all the calculations of the Scholium. Such errors as do not depend upon wrong reasoning can be of no great consequence & may be corrected by the reader.

Newton to Cotes June 15 1710

Suppression of evidence:

Mr. Raphson has printed off four or five sheets of his History of Fluxions, but being shew’d Sr. Is. Newton (who, it seems, would rather have them write against him, than have a piece done in that manner in his favour), he got a Stop put to it, for some time at least.

Jones to Cotes, 17 September 1711

Abusing the peer review system:

…only the Germans and French have in a violent manner attack’d the Philosophy of Sr. Is. Newton, and seem resolved to stand by Cartes; Mr. Keil, as a person concerned, has undertaken to answer and defend some things, as Dr. Friend, and Dr. Mead, does (in their way) the rest: I would have sent you ye whole controversy, was not I sure that you know, those only are most capable of objecting against his writings, that least understand them; however, in a little time, you’ll see some of these in ye Philos. Transact.

Jones to Cotes, October 25 1711

Insulting their critics:

The controversy concerning Sr. Isaac’s Philosophy is a piece of news that I had not heard of unless Muys’s late book be meant. I think that Philosophy needs no defence, especially when tis attack’t by Cartesians. One Mr Green a Fellow of Clare Hall in our University seems to have nearly the same design with those German & French objectors whom you mention. His book is now in our press & is almost finished. I am told he will add an appendix in which he undertakes also to square the circle. I need not recommend his performance any further to you.

Cotes to Jones, November 11 1711

EPA: Uranium From Polluted British Petroleum Mine Found In Nevada Water Wells

2009-11-21T22:04:41Z

YERINGTON, Nev. — Peggy Pauly lives in a robin-egg blue, two-story house not far from acres of onion fields that make the northern Nevada air smell sweet at harvest time.

But she can look through the window from her kitchen table, just past her backyard with its swingset and pet llama, and see an ominous sign on a neighboring fence: "Danger: Uranium Mine."

For almost a decade, people who make their homes in this rural community in the Mason Valley 65 miles southeast of Reno have blamed that enormous abandoned mine for the high levels of uranium in their water wells.

They say they have been met by a stone wall from state regulators, local politicians and the huge oil company that inherited the toxic site – BP PLC. Those interests have insisted uranium naturally occurs in the region's soil and there's no way to prove that a half-century of processing metals at the former Anaconda pit mine is responsible for the contamination.

That has changed. A new wave of testing by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has found that 79 percent of the wells tested north of the World War II-era copper mine have dangerous levels of uranium or arsenic or both that make the water unsafe to drink.

And, more importantly to the neighbors, that the source of the pollution is a groundwater plume that has slowly migrated from the 6-square-mile mine site.

The new samples likely never would have been taken if not for a whistleblower, a preacher's wife, a tribal consultant and some stubborn government scientists who finally helped crack the toxic mystery that has plagued this rural mining and farming community for decades.

"They have completely ruined the groundwater out here," said Pauly, the wife of a local pastor and mother of two girls who organized a community action group five years to seek the truth about the pollution.

"It almost sounds like we are happy the contamination has moved off the site," she said. "But what we are happy about is ... they have enough data to now answer our questions."

"Prior to this, we didn't really have an understanding of where water was moving," said Steve Acree, a highly regarded hydrogeologist for the EPA in Oklahoma, who was brought in to examine the test results. "My interpretation at this stage of the process is yes, you now have evidence of mine-impacted groundwater."

The tests found levels of uranium more than 10 times the legal drinking water standard in one monitoring well a half mile north of the mine. Though the health effects of specific levels are not well understood, the EPA says long-term exposure to high levels of uranium in drinking water may cause cancer and damage kidneys.

At the mine itself, wells tested as high as 3.4 milligrams per liter – more than 100 times the standard. That's in an area where ore was processed with sulfuric acid and other toxic chemicals in unlined ponds.

Moving north toward the mine's boundary and beyond, readings begin to decline but several wells still tested two to three times above health limits.

"The hot spots, the treatment areas on the site, are places you totally expect to see readings like that," said Dietrick McGinnis, an environmental consultant for the neighboring Yerington Paiute Tribe. "But this shows you have a continuous plume with decreasing concentration as you move away from the site."

The new findings are no surprise to Earle Dixon, the site's former project manager for the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, which owns about half of the property.

An administrative judge ruled last year that the BLM illegally fired Dixon in 2004 in retaliation for speaking out about the health and safety dangers at the mine.

"The new data depicts the story that I had tried to hypothesize as a possibility," Dixon told the AP.

"It was speculation, because I didn't have the dramatic evidence they have now. You just had all the symptoms," he said from New Mexico, where he is now a state geologist.

"The way the state has been telling the story and BP and Lyon County ... is this is mostly all natural. Well, no it's not," he said. "We now know for a fact that most of this uranium as far as 2 miles out from the mine comes from the mine.

"This site becomes a poster child for mining pollution."

Officials for BP, formerly known as British Petroleum, and its subsidiary Atlantic Richfield have insisted until now that the uranium could not be tied to the mine. They maintained the high concentrations were due to a naturally occurring phenomenon beneath Nevada's mineral-laden mountains.

The new discovery has Pauly, McGinnis and others renewing a call for the EPA to declare the mine a Superfund site – something the state and county have opposed despite a new potential source of money to help cover cleanup costs that could reach hundreds of millions of dollars.

Jill Lufrano, spokeswoman for the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection, said an investigation into the source of contamination is continuing but "the new finding does put scientific confirmation behind the theory that this would migrate off site."

She said the new evidence doesn't change the state's opposition to Superfund listing. Nevada has a long tradition of supporting mining and now produces more gold than anywhere in the world except China, South Africa and Australia.

Copper first was discovered around Yerington in 1865. Anaconda bought the property in 1941 and – fueled by demand after World War II – produced nearly 1.75 billion pounds of copper from 1952-78.

A mineral firm launched a then-secret plan to produce yellowcake uranium from the mine's waste piles in the 1970s. An engineer reported in 1976 that they weren't finding as much uranium as anticipated in the processing ponds. "Where could it be now?" he wrote. "Should we continue to look for it?"

Had they continued the search outside the processing area, Wyoming Mineral Corp. likely would have detected the movement of the contamination. But the market for uranium dipped and the company scuttled the venture.

Pauly never suspected the mine was leaking contamination when she and her husband finished building their home in 1990. They drank water from their well until 2003 – and used it to mix formula for a baby from 1996-98 – before becoming suspicious as rumors swirled about the contaminated mine.

"Everybody said it was fine," she said. "Legally they didn't have to disclose anything because technically there was nothing definitive then that showed the contamination was moving off the site."

BP and Atlantic Richfield, which bought Anaconda Copper Co. in 1978, have stopped claiming there is no evidence the mine caused any contamination, but they aren't conceding anything about how much.

"We know the mine has had an impact but to what extent is not really known at this time," Tom Mueller, spokesman for BP America in Houston, told The Associated Press in a recent e-mail. He said the sampling "remains inconclusive regarding relative impacts from the mine" compared with other potential sources.

Yerington Paiute Tribe Chairman Elwood Emm said he hopes the new findings help expedite cleanup. "In the meantime, we continue to lose our water resource," he said.

So who will pay for the cleanup?

"That is the million-dollar question," Dixon said. "Every Superfund site needs an advocate or two or three and in my view there are none for Yerington except for Peggy Pauly."

Regardless of who pays, Acree said, it likely will take decades to clean up.

(This version CORRECTS SUBS 4th graf to correct to BP PLC, sted British Petroleum. Minor EDITS.)

Kevin Grandia: Stolen CRU emails: Who are the criminals behind the conspiracy theorists?

2009-11-21T19:39:08Z

Former Republican strategist Marc Morano is having as much fun with the stolen emails from the Climate Research Unit that he did with the Swift Boat Veteran's for Truth attack he led against John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.

Morano and his site Climate Depot has become the climate conspiracy hub since this story broke on late Thursday.

This cabal of climate deniers seems to think that 12 year-old emails between climate scientists somehow refutes the thousands of research papers produced over decades by thousands of researchers at some of the best scientific institutions in the world.

While Morano is the master of right-wing spin and is using these emails for his political agenda, the bigger question here is:

Who stole all this private data from the University in the first place?

The folder of information contains over 3,800 separate files and it is clear that someone has taken a lot of time to pull together what they thought would be the most damaging. This is not the work of a hacker, unless that hacker is extremely well-versed in climate science, and specifically the conspiracy theories of the climate denial movement.

This package of stolen data and emails would have taken hundreds of hours to compile and someone out there knows exactly how all this went down.

Terry Hurlbut at the Examiner has a time line of the stolen data going public which is a good start. I am sure one of our intrepid readers will get to the bottom of this. Tell you what. I'll race you.

Who's Eating Madagascar's Lemurs?

2009-11-21T16:40:53Z

Bit by bit, the natural resources of Madagascar -- a biodiversity hotspot known for its unique vegetation and wildlife -- are being plundered.

Animals That Light Up (PHOTOS, VIDEO)

2009-11-21T14:28:18Z

Bioluminescence is an incredible thing. Take a look at these photos and videos of the coolest underwater and land animals that have the special ability of light up. Talk about inner glow!

Enjoy the slideshow, and vote for your favorite glowing critter.

Get HuffPost Green On Facebook and Twitter!

Michael Plank Strapped 15 Live Lizards To His Chest, Arrested At Airport: Authorities Say

2009-11-21T04:52:32Z

LOS ANGELES — Federal officials say they arrested a man who strapped 15 live lizards to his chest to get through customs at Los Angeles International Airport.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said Friday that 40-year-old Michael Plank of Lomita, Calif., was returning from Australia when U.S. Customs agents found two geckos, two monitor lizards and 11 skinks – another type of lizard – fastened to his body Tuesday.

Plank has been released on $10,000 bond and will be arraigned in federal court on Dec. 21.

Authorities say the lizards' value totals more than $8,500. All Australian reptiles are strictly regulated and Plank did not have a permit for them.

Bob Dinneen: Reminding Al Gore: 5 'Encouraging Truths' About Ethanol

2009-11-21T00:39:41Z

Having an appreciation for Al Gore's commitment to science and advocacy of responsible policies on energy, the environment, and the economy, I was disappointed by his treatment of ethanol and other biofuels in his new book, Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis.

During the late 1970s, Gore was an early supporter of grain-based ethanol and other efforts to promote biofuels. Now, as he writes in his new book, Our Choice, he has changed his mind.

Because of his devotion to science and the facts, I have sent him a detailed letter, filled with what I hope he'll consider encouraging, not inconvenient, truths:

Encouraging Truth #1: Ethanol has come of age.

Ethanol has come a long way since when Gore first championed it. With 10.5 billion gallons set to be produced and sold this year, ethanol is a major factor in America's motor fuel supply. Today's ethanol industry is helping support nearly 500,000 jobs, providing more than $20 billion in new household incomes. Last year alone, the use of ethanol reduced emissions by the equivalent of removing 2.1 million gallons from American highways.

Encouraging Truth #2: American agriculture and the US ethanol industry are improving their productivity without jeopardizing the environment.

The average corn yield this season is 163 bushels per acre - up from 101 bushels in 1978. Higher yields have been achieved through better technology and farming practices, not through increased use of fertilizers, pesticides and other inputs. In fact, there has been a 27% decrease in irrigation water use per bushel, a 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions per bushel, a 37% decrease in the land required per bushel, a 37% decrease in energy required per bushel; and 69% reduction in soil loss per bushel.

Meanwhile, improvements in corn ethanol production efficiency are following a similar path, including a 27% decrease in consumptive water use, a 22% reduction in fossil energy use, and a 7% increase in the amount of ethanol produced per bushel of grain in just the past five years.

Encouraging Truth #3: 'Food vs. fuels' is a false choice.

Gore writes "...further diversion of cropland from food to fuel will put upward pressure on food prices at a time when many impoverished regions of the world are facing growing concerns about food security." But the increased use of grain for ethanol in the United States has not reduced the amount of grain available for livestock feed, food processing, or exports. Furthermore, cropland is not being "diverted" from food and feed production.

Instead, increased productivity per unit of land has ensured that adequate supplies of grain are available for all uses, including biofuels. The US achieved a new record for corn exports in 2007, amid a significant biofuels boom. Corn exports have topped 2 billion bushels in four of the last five years, the first time in history that such volumes have occurred in a five-year span.

None of this obscures the moral and practical urgency of world hunger. But, as Gore well knows, the problems are access to food and food security. Producing ethanol is not the cause of these crises, and curtailing the production of biofuels is not the cure. There cannot be food security without energy security

Encouraging Truth #4: Ethanol doesn't increase greenhouse gas emissions.

Gore also writes: "largely because modern agriculture is so petroleum intensive, net greenhouse gas emissions from corn-based ethanol turn out to be almost equal to the emissions from gasoline." But corn ethanol production is not a "petroleum intensive" process. In a 2006 analysis, a group of researchers at U.C. Berkeley found that producing one unit of ethanol energy requires 20 times less petroleum than producing one unit of gasoline energy.

Encouraging Truth #5: Today's ethanol builds the foundation for the next generation of biofuels.

While Gore writes, "The production of ethanol in first generation biorefineries has been a disappointment," he goes on to admit: "However, it has... led to the emergence of an infrastructure that will prove highly valuable when second generation technologies are available to produce ethanol from nonfood crops." This includes shipping ethanol via pipelines, which occurs today all across Brazil and in the state of Florida.

That is one reason why corn-based ethanol is not a mistake. Rather, it is providing a strong economic and environmentally sustainable foundation upon which the next generation of biofuels, including improvements in existing technologies, will be built. Therefore, utilizing what is available today, the US should expand the demand, distribution and transportation of ethanol so that we can build a strong foundation for the next generation of biofuels.

Mr. Vice President, an objective review of the facts as they exist today lead to one inevitable conclusion: biofuels must be part of "our choice."

Top 25 Reasons To Care About Climate Change

2009-11-20T23:14:34Z

For some people, climate change is a tough cause to rally 'round--even those who understand that it's happening and that it's human-caused get distracted by things like eating, working, having sex, watching TV, or watching people on TV have sex.

While social scientists ponder the best ways to get the message out and motivate the masses--and since we're gearing up to cover December's climate talks in Copenhagen--we've devised a Grist list of good reasons to care about this global crisis.

The World's First Green Surfboards

2009-11-20T23:12:45Z

In San Clemente, a start-up company called Green Foam Blanks is out to change a half-century of surfboard-making tradition. Its founders, Joey Santley and Steve Cox, have created what is thought to be the world's first recycled polyurethane blank -- the foam core of a surfboard.

Get Inspired By 10 Amazing Examples Of Eco Art

2009-11-20T23:04:42Z

Maybe it's time we tap into our inner child-artist and try some more creative and open-minded approaches like, as a first step, using green art to convey the urgency without the ideology.

But...what the hell is green art?

The gang at Eco-Art.org offers this list of how environmental artists often work.

Regifting: Green Giving This Holiday Season

2009-11-20T23:01:15Z

Before you flash the plastic, consider shopping at home for the holidays this year. Shop your closets, cabinets and plastic storage bins. Browse your basement, your attic, and the space under your beds. All that accumulated clutter that isn't right for you? It may be perfect for someone else. Yes, it's time we added a word to the "reduce, reuse, recycle" mantra: "regift."