Green on HuffingtonPost.com

David Kirby: The Future of Factory Farming: Barack Obama and the "Rural Agenda" (Part Two)

2009-11-11T22:22:00Z

Part Two: White House Realities

(Note: This is the second part of an essay adapted from David Kirby's upcoming book Animal Factory. To read PART ONE, please click here).

In 2008, Barack Obama was swept to victory on a national wave of desire for change -- change that included a coherent program for curbing many of the excesses associated with modern American animal agriculture.

Obama's Plan to Support Rural Communities appeared on the White House website in January, 2009, and read like a manifesto from grassroots groups trying to defend their vision of what a traditional, sustainable agrarian way of life should be.

The main problem, Obama said, was that family farmers were being squeezed out by big industry. "Consolidation has made it harder for mid-size family farmers to get fair prices for their products and compete on the open market," his plan began. "Rural communities are often left behind." To counter that, Obama vowed to take action, including:

Provide a Strong Safety Net for Family Farmers: Target financial support to family farmers, impose a $250,000 payment cap to fight consolidation, and close "loopholes that allow mega farms to get around the limits."

Prevent Anticompetitive Behavior Against Family Farms: Give independent farmers "fair access to markets, control over their production decisions, and transparency in prices," and pass laws that protect "independent producers by banning the ownership of livestock by meat packers," who produce more than 20 percent of the nation's hogs. "When meatpackers own livestock, they bid less aggressively for hogs and cattle produced by independent farmers," the Obama document said.

Regulate CAFOs: - Set tough air and water pollution limits on nitrogen, phosphorus, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, and other pollutants, and "strictly monitor and
regulate pollution from large CAFOs, with fines for those who violate tough air and water quality standards."

Encourage Organic and Sustainable Agriculture: Help meet demand "for sustainable, locally grown, grass-finished and heritage foods, which is growing quickly," by supporting niche markets and "the continued growth of sustainable alternative agriculture."

They were heartening words for many reformers, but most of them remain as nothing more than words. True, the president has an extraordinary spoonful of troubles on his plate, and most CAFO activists remain patient and optimistic that their issues will not get buried and forgotten after the "fierce urgency of now" has passed.

The administration refused to answer a few simple questions on agriculture policy, though the White House did email me this statement:

During the campaign the President outlined a vision for rural America that focused on rejuvenating local economies and protecting family farmers. That agenda has not changed. The Administration's priorities are reflected in the President's budget, the allocation of critical Recovery Act funding, and a new culture of leadership at USDA based on developing sustainable rural economies.

But in July, a group called the Socially Responsible Agriculture Project was invited by USDA to present their ideas for reform. They leapt at the chance.

"We hope these suggestions start a new dialogue between USDA and the sustainable farming community," the group wrote to Secretary Tom Vilsack, suggesting how "limited resources could re-establish the kind of agriculture that fed this nation successfully for so long."

Sustainable agriculture had received short shrift in Obama's budget, where SDA programs were still "structured to promote and subsidize the failed model of large, corporate farms and vertically integrated processing and distribution."

Measures to counter that trend included:

■ Put greater focus on farmers beginning or transitioning to socially responsible meat production and provide USDA funding for CAFOs to convert over sustainable models.

■ Fund purchases of local, sustainable food for school lunches, colleges/universities, military bases, prisons, etc, to help local farmers and provide healthy foods.

■ Provide start-up assistance for small, multi-species processing facilities within 30-45 minutes of each other and link them to mobile processing units.

■ Limit animal ownership by meat packers to no more than 14 days before slaughter and require that a daily percentage of meat-packer purchases come from an open-bid market.

■ Publicize and educate the general public on the merits of supporting "local, safe and healthful food systems," and on what it means to local economies and the environment.

To everyone's astonishment, Vilsack sent back a prompt and encouraging letter. He was not only listening, but thinking along at least some of the same lines.

I hope the outcome of current USDA activities will reassure you that we are in sync with many of your views," he wrote, adding three main points:

1) You can expect action from GIPSA (the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration) in the near future responding to USDA's responsibility to promote rules that level the playing field for livestock producers and to better define where unnecessary preferences are being granted to larger producers.

2) We will be announcing a program, "Know your farmer, know your food" that would promote linking local production more closely to local consumption. We intend to use some of the program funding in Rural Development for the development of an enhanced supply chain infrastructure so we can ramp up sales to larger consumers - schools, hospitals - in a community.

3) Through (stimulus and other funds) USDA is preparing to make the largest investment in rural development in my lifetime.

Tom Vilsack

It wasn't the only promising news for activists. In August, Vilsack and US Attorney General Eric Holder announced joint public workshops "to explore competition issues affecting the agriculture industry in the 21st Century and the appropriate role for antitrust and regulatory enforcement in that industry"

Among the leading issues are vertical integration and "concerns about the application of the antitrust laws to the agricultural industry." Other issues that might get on the agenda include "the impact of agriculture concentration on food costs, packer ownership of livestock before slaughter, market transparency, and increasing retailer concentration."

Finally, on October 15, 2009, EPA released its Clean Water Act Enforcement Action Plan, which targets CAFOs for more federal oversight. EPA will "pursue new strategies to enforce existing rules" on CAFOs, especially in areas "close to imperiled waters."

CAFOs have grown "larger and more densely located, placing more stress on waters in proximity to these locations," and they "result in a large pollution load to the environment." EPA vowed to "make progress in reducing violations and water pollution from these facilities."

Many received the plan with cautious optimism. "Obama has announced stepped up enforcement of the Clean Water Act, with specific reference to CAFOs, and it's making the meat industry quite nervous, of course," Nicolette Hahn-Niman, an environmental attorney who has successfully sued CAFOs, told me. "What I'd like to know is this: Will they now finally be forcing all CAFOs to get CWA permits? If not, they are not going nearly far enough."

And even if Obama takes on issues like water pollution, anti-competitive measures and boosting local food systems, many are still awaiting action on subsidies, a packer ban, antibiotic overuse, animal welfare, and stricter controls on air pollution.

In September, the Humane Society of the United States and several environmental and public health organizations filed a legal petition at EPA to regulate animal factory air pollution.

"Unregulated air pollution from massive factory farms has a devastating impact on human health and the environment," said Jonathan Lovvorn, vice president and chief counsel for Animal Protection Litigation and Research at The HSUS. "The EPA should hold these big agribusiness corporations accountable for the enormous harm they are inflicting on local communities, independent family farmers, and the environment."

Meanwhile, Obama's rhetoric reflects a vast departure in thinking from that of his predecessor. But thoughts and words are meaningless without action. Anti-CAFO activists who worked hard to elect Barack Obama are waiting for their return investment. Their candidate never did deliver on his promised Natonal Rural Summit, it's true, but reformers are finally starting to see some promising signs from Washington.

And, as they will relentlessly remind the President, he and his CAFO pledges are firmly on the record.

Are animal factories here to stay? Whatever the Obama team decides to do -- or not do -- could have a huge impact on the way we raise food animals in America for decades to come.

Adapted from Animal Factory: The Looming Threat of Industrial Hog, Dairy and Poultry Farms to Humans and the Environment, to be released by St. Martin's Press in early 2010.

Bruce Nilles: Rally at Penn State: Students Taking Lead on Clean Energy

2009-11-11T20:58:34Z

This post was co-written by Kim Teplitzky, field coordinator for the Sierra Student Coalition

Today at Penn State University, dozens of students, faculty, and community members rallied in front of university's coal plant, calling on the university to move beyond coal to clean energy solutions.

"Young people have been at the forefront of the greatest social movements in history, including the fledgling environmental movement that brought us Earth Day and put out flaming rivers," said Penn State junior Chris Billman, who spoke at the event. "We're working to continue that legacy of creating a better future and the most important thing we can address right now is our dependence on coal. We can't have a clean energy future without moving beyond coal."

Many find it strange that the Nittany Lions still rely on coal despite the university's other strides toward clean energy. "The biggest surprise to people is how much we rely on coal," said sophomore Rose Monahan, a leader with Penn State Beyond Coal. "They know we use it, but they didn't know that we get 80% of our energy from coal-fired power plants."

And yet Penn State has made some progress. For example, Penn State is a member of the Environmental Protection Agency's Sustainability Partnership Program, which has the school committed to reducing its global warming pollution 17% by 2012.

University clean energy student groups have praised the administration for its commitment to sustainability and for initiatives the school has already undertaken to reduce carbon emissions. According to the College Sustainability Report Card, Penn State purchases 20% of its power from renewable sources.

Students and faculty are now calling on the school to commit to developing a plan and timeline for phasing out the school's 80-year-old on-campus coal plant.

Thankfully, there is some progress on that end at Penn State. University President Graham Spanier has agreed to meet student leaders this semester to discuss the topic.

"This is an enormous opportunity for Penn State," said Monahan. "We're looking forward to working with President Spanier, the rest of the administration, faculty, and students to expand Penn State's reputation for leadership and excellence to the clean energy movement."

Penn State Geography Professor Brent Yarnal, who has spearheaded regional and national greenhouse gas inventories and climate change impact assessments, also spoke at today's rally and praised the students for understanding the urgency of climate change and for wanting their school to lead the movement.

We agree: With some of the world's leading climate scientists on faculty and a history of student activism, Penn State should be a leader for Pennsylvania and all the large, public university systems in the nation.

Monahan echoed that sentiment.

"People are finally really start to talk about (clean energy)," said Monahan. "They realize how big an issue it's going to be. Penn State is worried about carbon emissions, but we could definitely go bigger.
"If there's any school that can step up to address the enormous challenges associated with coal reliance, it's Penn State. As President Spanier says, Penn State thinks big. Coal is too dirty for our school--we're better than that."

Learn more about how coal is Too Dirty For College

Jeff Biggers: Big Coal and Child Victims: Child Labor, Coal Abuse, on Cherry Mine Disaster Anniversary

2009-11-11T20:49:42Z

This Friday, November 13th, marks the 100th anniversary of the Cherry Mine Disaster in Illinois, when an estimated 259 coal miners lost their lives to fire and the buildup of "black damp" or toxic gases. The St. Paul Coal Company Mine in Cherry was hailed by its consulting engineer as the "safest mine in the world."

While we take time to reflect on the heroic sacrifices of coal miners and their families this week, the Cherry Mine Disaster remains a haunting reminder of the secret legacy of child labor in our coal mines--and its unconscionable use today.

Big Coal front groups like to peddle their "Coal is Cool" curriculum in schools--including a bizarre "Mars Invasion" project to help children play with the planning of coal camps on Mars--and disingenuous coal coloring books.

The Kid's "Coal" Site at the Illinois Department Commerce does not mention the Cherry Mine Disaster or child labor in the Illinois coal mines--but it does erroneously tell children that devastating strip mining and reclamation "is returning the land to the way it was or better than before mining" and that burned coal does not affect the environment, because "Technologies were developed to remove these chemicals from coal before, during and after it is burned. These technologies are called clean- coal technologies."

An estimated 27,000 children worked in American coal mines during the "period of disasters" of Cherry, despite child labor laws and age limits. Their horrific experiences as breaker boys have been chronicled by the Mine Safety and Health Administration.

Among the Cherry Mine dead were four children, who had been hired illegally. An estimated 470 children became orphans in Cherry. In Trapped: The 1909 Cherry Mine Disaster, author Karen Tintori notes, "the St. Paul Coal Company pled guilty to nine counts of child labor law violations and was fined a total of $630."

That's $70 a child--the worth of a child laborer in the coal mines in 1909.

And today?

According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees, child labor in coal mines continues in Pakistan, Mongolia, Nepal, Indonesia and Colombia, where government agencies estimate that thousands of children are working in illegal mines. Last year, a Chinese blogger exposed the abuse of homeless children as coal haulers in China. In 2007, the BBC reported on child labor in coal mines of southern Kyrgyzstan near uranium dumps.

A British documentary crew recently aired a film, "Hell on Earth," about the deathly conditions for children and families as coal scavengers and miners in northern India:

Child labor in the coal mines is not the only abuse of children from irresponsible coal companies. As the Miami Herald reported last week, legal representatives on behalf of villagers in the Dominican Republic have filed a suit against the Virginia-based AES company for birth defects related to coal ash dumping. Here's the video:

A report in the NY Times last month blew the cover on Clean Water Act violations by coal companies, and chronicled the impact of coal slurry on the health of children in Prenter, West Virginia.

And today, the AP is reporting that the School Board Authority in West Virginia is now hedging on seeking funds for Marsh Fork Elementary School in West Virginia, which infamously sits below a massive coal slurry impoundment, and where kids play near toxic coal dust silos. Here's a clip on retired coal miner Ed Wiley about the Marsh Fork school situation:

May we never forget the coal miners and children at the Cherry Mine Disaster.

Zoe McMahon: Accountability for Minerals in the Eastern DRC

2009-11-11T20:03:16Z

Recently, at the annual BSR conference, I had the opportunity to elaborate on the challenges the overall IT sector faces with regards to traceability through our supply chain and the activities underway at Hewlett Packard.

The topic of traceability is gaining momentum. Industry sectors ranging from food, textiles and many others, are expected to know both the country of origin of their raw materials and the sustainability of the methods used to extract them. During my participation in the conference, I described the challenges of tracing "conflict minerals" in HP's supply chain. These minerals which may be used in electronics have recently appeared on political and civil society agendas, especially in the United States and Western Europe.

As another step toward addressing this concern, on October 20, HP, Dell, Intel, Motorola and Philips co-hosted a multi-industry forum on the topic of metals extraction issues, set to coincide with the BSR conference. More than forty attendees discussed potential industry actions to address the reported role of the mineral trade in financing of armed conflict in the Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.

The specific metals under discussion are gold, tin, tantalum and tungsten. To varying degrees, these metals are used in components commonly found in electronic products (Social and Environmental Responsibility in Metals Supply to the Electronic Industry). Tantalum is arguably the most significant metal on the list for the electronics sector. It is used extensively in the production of capacitors for electronic equipment. All four metals are used by many other industries, such as automotive and aerospace. In the case of gold, products from other industries represent the majority of their use. In addition to being used broadly, none of the metals are exclusively mined in the Eastern DRC or even in Africa.

As such, the aim of the forum was to define a multi-industry path to assure that these metals are sourced from mines not associated with the conflict in the DRC. While the meeting was not attended particularly well by sectors outside the electronics industry, the broad representation from the electronics industry as well as NGOs, certification bodies and other stakeholders led to a lively and informative debate about this very topical issue. As a group, we believe that we will not be successful unless significant users of these metals come together to address this issue.

Based on the discussion, it was clear that a dual strategy is warranted. First, we must address the concerns in the Eastern DRC region (and the responsible sourcing of metals in general) by engaging multi-industries and all stakeholders to develop an effective system of mineral certification and supply chain assurance for metals. Second, international and local governments, institutional investors, development agencies, and civil society must continue to ensure that resources are focussed on the elimination of the conflict and its root causes.

Although the electronics industry can't solve this issue alone, we at HP believe that addressing conflict minerals is a natural extension of our existing efforts. Since the launch of HP's Supply Chain Social and Environmental Responsibility (SER) Program in 2000 -- the first of its kind in our industry -- we at HP have made ourselves accountable for our product materials and manufacturing suppliers' SER performance. Fundamentally, we expect suppliers to conduct their worldwide operations in a manner that does not result in labor or human rights violations and that includes operations which contribute to the direct financing of armed conflict. We have built a commitment to SER among our supplier base and begun to tackle the toughest challenges in the supply chain. We are also committed to transparency and in 2007 HP became the first company in our sector to disclose our list of suppliers.

HP has surveyed our suppliers, and they have responded that there is limited traceability to the level of the mine. This is, without a doubt, the biggest challenge ahead for the electronics sector. The Electronics Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC) and the Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI) have working groups and projects aimed at both better understanding, and developing systems of assurance for, metals' supply chain in the electronics sector (especially tantalum). Other efforts exist within specific metal industries like tin, as well as jewelry sector and the mining industry itself. At some point, these efforts will need to unite, helping all of us bring an effective solution for sourcing minerals responsibly.

In keeping with our history of supply chain social and environmental responsibility, HP is working to ensure that our products do not contain metals sourced from mineral trade financing the armed conflict in the DRC. We will take further steps to educate our own supply chain and develop an approach to validate the assurances from our suppliers. We will continue to work with our sector and other industries using minerals from the region to develop an effective, cross-industry solution. In addition, HP will engage with groups with firsthand experience of the situation in the Eastern DRC to gain further insight into the specifics of the challenges ahead. Tremendous power and influence can be exerted when people from many perspectives come together to solve a common problem.

Your Personalized Green Hip Hop Video

2009-11-11T18:54:13Z

click through to get your personalized green hip hop video.

Rockslide In Tennessee Caught On Tape (VIDEO)

2009-11-11T18:12:19Z

A news crew in Polk County, Tennessee caught this massive rockslide on video. The rockslide closed the highway for at last a week, CNN reports.

WATCH:

Bill Chameides: Whither Wilderness?

2009-11-11T17:10:16Z

Originally published at www.thegreengrok.com.

Wilderness is a state of mind, argues environmental historian Roderick Nash.

Yesterday the Duke community was treated to a visit by one of the giants of the environmental movement.

A founder of one of the nation's first environmental studies programs at the University of California, Santa Barbara, Roderick Nash is also the author of eight books. These include two classics: Wilderness and the American Mind (Yale University Press, 1967), which tracks the role of wilderness in the American psyche through history, and The Rights of Nature: A History of Environmental Ethics (University of Wisconsin Press, 1989), which argues for widening the notion of ethics to include animals, ecosystems, and even inanimate objects like mountains.

What's in a Name?

Nash, visiting Duke on a Distinguished Lectureship sponsored by the Forest History Society, opened his talk with a fascinating riff on the word wilderness and its meanings. Many consider "wild" to be the root of the word, but Nash argues that the kernel of wilderness can be found in "wil" and its close association with "will" and by extension to "free will" and "freedom." (The Oxford English Dictionary acknowledges "uncertainty as to its primary meaning.") Wilderness can thus be understood as "self-willed land." So, destroying wilderness by domesticating land is to break its will, much like one might break a horse.

To care or protect wilderness requires a guardian as opposed to a gardener. Gardeners prune, weed and harvest. Guardians "let go" and allow the land to follow its own path. For this reason, Nash appears distrustful of practices that remove so-called exotic or invasive species from wilderness lands. To retain true wilderness, he argues, we must allow the Darwinian progression to play out without interference.

Winding Road of Progress

As I mentioned in my opening, for Nash, wilderness is not a specific thing but a concept. We can all agree what a tree or a mountain looks like, but whether either one is part of a wilderness is a subjective judgment.

Nash argues that some 10,000 years ago through the birth of agriculture and animal husbandry humankind created the notion of wilderness. By cordoning off and domesticating tracts of land for our own use, we set boundaries beyond which, we perceived, lay a different sort of land, the wilderness. It's a fascinating idea: without domesticated land, there is no wilderness.

To illustrate Americans' concept of wilderness before the 20th century, Nash showed American Progress, a John Gast painting from 1872 that depicts the westward march of civilization across the United States (on the right) into the dark edges of the wilderness peopled by Native Americans, aka Indians. Leading the journey is a personified America, flying overhead carrying a school book and stringing the telegraph wires that would connect the two coasts. In Nash's words, it was a march of "godly development" into "satanic wilderness."

The turning point in America's view of wilderness occurred, according to Nash, at the end of the 19th century. Before the 1890s, the commonly held perception was that wilderness was something to be feared and tamed -- much like the dark lands in American Progress. But by 1890, with the West Coast civilized and the places in between too small to be considered wilderness, the job of taming the American wilderness was largely completed; in that year the U.S. Census Bureau declared that the American frontier, the boundary between civilization and wilderness, was no more.

It was then, Nash maintains, that American began to recognize what they'd lost and to view the wilderness as something to be treasured and protected. Thus was born the conservation movement, championed by Teddy Roosevelt and John Muir, Sierra Club founder and a driving force behind designating Yosemite a national park.

Less obvious signs of America's growing nostalgia for the wildness of wilderness came in the names of the country's first football teams, such as the Giants, Redskins, and 49ers; the success of books like Call of the Wild from 1903 and Tarzan of the Apes first published in 1912; and the incorporation of the Boy Scouts of America in 1910.

Which of Three Futures

Nash closed with a vision of three possible scenarios for humanity and the planet at the start of the fourth millennium 1,000 years hence.

The Wasteland, in which humanity has essentially used up the planet, leaving nothing behind but desolation. Remaining survivors either exist in spaceships searching for new habitats or toil under conditions more primitive than those of the earliest hunter-gatherers.
The Garden Earth, in which humanity continues to thrive but has totally domesticated the planet. The sole survivors are either humans or organisms grown for human use. There are no wild places.
The Island Civilization, in which humanity has learned to live in harmony with nature and, more importantly, wilderness. All the people, numbering about 1.5 billion, live in islands of civilization. The rest of the planet is wilderness -- no roads, no strip malls, no nothing except the wild. Instead of today's world where wilderness is cordoned off from civilization in ever smaller pockets, civilization in this scenario is barricaded from wilderness, kind of like those early patches of domesticated land 10,000 years ago. People wanting to live in the wilderness can, but they'd be creatures of the wilderness without the benefits of civilization. No calls for help on a cell phone if trouble arises.

Not surprisingly, Nash's choice is the Island Civilization. As attractive as it is, I see some problems in making that third scenario a reality and keeping it alive. The downfall of Aldous Huxley's utopian community in Island readily comes to mind. Nevertheless, utopias are worth thinking about and envisioning, so I will close with this quote from Nash:

"The beauty of Island Civilization is that it permits humans to fulfill their evolutionary potential without compromising or eliminating the opportunity of other species doing the same."

Frances Beinecke: Talking With Ban Ki-Moon About His Hopes for Copenhagen

2009-11-11T16:26:33Z

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon is hopeful that the December climate conference in Copenhagen will be elevated to the head-of-state level, assuring that the session will receive top-order attention from the world's leaders.

He told me that on Tuesday when we met in Washington, where Ban is continuing to lend his eloquent voice and diplomatic finesse to the most pressing environmental problem of our time.

Ban has traveled from the Arctic Circle to the deserts of sub-Saharan Africa to get a first-hand look at the ravages of global climate change. He hosted President Barack Obama and more than 100 heads of state in New York this September for a climate change conference. And his tireless efforts to pull together global consensus on how to address this widening scourge has added immeasurably to the momentum building worldwide for change.

Raising Copenhagen to the level of a heads-of-state summit is yet another sign of movement. It's not yet clear whether Obama will go. Much depends on what he feels his presence might add.

What's important, also, is that the Senate demonstrate forward motion on the clean energy and climate legislation pending there now. Few expect to Senate to pass this complex bill in the next several weeks. Principles and progress, though, count.

If key Senate leaders can send a message to Copenhagen that this country is serious about doing something about climate change -- and about helping developing countries deal with the fallout - that would go a long way toward reflecting the urgency and hope Ban is sensing around Copenhagen.

In my own way, I'm trying to help. I presented Ban with a copy of my new book, Clean Energy Common Sense: An American Call to Action on Global Climate Change.

This is part of our effort to reach out and explain how we can put Americans back to work, reduce our reliance on foreign oil and create a healthier future for ourselves and our children, I told him.

"It's a very short book," Ban said, smiling at the small paperback. "It's handy."

Ban slipped it into his suit pocket, as though he might keep it "handy" for his next airplane flight.

"I'd like to thank you and the NRDC for your strong commitment and advocacy, especially now, just a few days from Copenhagen," said Ban. "Receiving this is a good message."

I smiled back, because that's exactly why I wrote the book -- and why I wrote it now.

Addressing climate change is something we need to do for ourselves, as Americans, because will make our economy stronger and our country more secure. There's an added benefit, though, in showing American leadership at a time when it's needed most.

Leadership is something we know something about.

We led in World War II. We led during the Cold War. We have led a democratic and free-market revolution that has changed the world. And we can lead once more in an effort to consolidate the gathering global consensus around the need to address climate change.

This post originally appeared on NRDC’s Switchboard blog.

Lindsey Graham Censured By SC County GOP For Working With Democrats On Climate Bill

2009-11-11T16:23:16Z

CHARLESTON, S.C. — Republican leaders in a South Carolina county have censured their own U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham for working with Democrats on a climate bill and other legislation.

The Republican has often worked with Democrats in Congress, but Charleston County Chairwoman Lin Bennett says his work on climate legislation is the last straw.

The party resolution passed Monday says Graham has weakened the Republican brand. Bennett expects a similar resolution to be introduced at the state GOP convention next year.

Graham spokesman Kevin Bishop says Graham is looking for a way forward on energy legislation.

Patrick McCully: Finally, Good News on Climate! US Carbon Emissions Drop

2009-11-11T16:20:48Z

One rare piece of good news on climate has gone little noticed among all the alarming new science and bizarre weather: US CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels have been on a steep decline. The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) predicts that 2009 emissions will be almost 9% lower than in 2005, their highest year on record.

The largest single reason for the decline is (obviously) the recession, but growing investments in renewables and energy efficiency, and a switch from dirty coal to clean(ish) natural gas generation are also responsible. The price paid by electricity utilities for natural gas has halved over the past year -- while that for coal increased by 7%. New exploration and drilling technologies mean that US natural gas reserves are now far higher than thought a couple of years ago, so the price advantage of coal relative to gas is likely to stay low.

The EIA predicts that structural changes in the US energy economy, boosted by the efficiency and renewable subsidies in Obama’s stimulus package, mean that emissions will not regain their 2005 level until 2024. Prominent climate blogger Joe Romm, a former Department of Energy official, points out that EIA’s models fail to take into account inevitable changes in the energy economy in the coming decades. They do not allow for any new policies on clean energy and climate, and no peak oil, “so the only thing one can say for certain about an EIA forecast is that there is no chance whatsoever it will come true.” Romm believes that believes that US emissions have peaked and will never return to their 2005 level.

The drop in emissions means that we are already more than halfway to the goal of the cap-and-trade bill passed by the House of Representatives of a 17% cut from 2005 to 2020 -- showing just how unacceptably weak the goal is (science shows that the US needs to cut its emissions to around half of 2005 levels).

If the targets aren’t tightened in whatever cap-and-trade bill gets signed into law by Obama (the Kerry-Boxer bill in the Senate is slightly better with a -- 20% target), its likely that far too many allowances (the “permits to pollute” that are the currency of the trading scheme) will be available, crashing the permit price and removing the incentive for polluters to act to bend down the emissions curve.

Falling emissions, and the possibility that we’ve reached peak carbon for the US, is great news. But is also shows that Congress is missing a massive opportunity to promote policies that would accelerate the emissions drop to levels close to where the science suggests we need to be, while also promoting all the co-benefits of a decarbonizing economy: better health, cleaner air, green jobs, improved housing, and more pleasant towns and cities.

Robert Redford: Common Sense for the Clean Energy and Climate Debate

2009-11-11T16:07:23Z

In January of 1776, Philadelphia essayist Thomas Paine published a 47-page pamphlet that changed the world. Within three months, Common Sense had sold 150,000 copies -- in a land of just 2.5 million people -- framing the terms of debate for the American colony's epic break from British rule. By July of that year, the national conversation charged by Paine's work culminated in the Declaration of Independence.

In that hallowed tradition, Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, has penned a modern classic in revolutionary thought. Titled Clean Energy, Common Sense, this book calls on us, as a nation, to rise to the challenge of climate change while there's still time to act.

Time is of such essence, Frances writes, that every American of conscience must
be engaged. Reading this essay is an essential first step.

Like Paine's pamphlet, Clean Energy, Common Sense is small enough to fit into your pocket and brief enough to read in two hours. It is accessible and timely and destined to shape the climate conversation now, when it matters most.

Because right now, the Senate is debating the single most important environmental bill of this generation: a clean energy and climate act that could generate millions of jobs and slash our global warming emissions.

But the stakes are higher still. In a few days, President Obama will travel to China, where climate change and clean energy will be top of the agenda. No doubt both nations will be positioning themselves for the international climate talks in Copenhagen in December.

This is a pivotal moment in our nation's history, a time when complex and fateful decisions must be made.

There are people of good will who hear claims on both sides of the climate change debate and aren't sure what to believe. If that feels familiar, this little book is for you.

In a clear and compelling tone, Beinecke draws from the most current and authoritative sources anywhere to lay out the case for American action against world climate change. She outlines solutions that can help get American workers back on their feet, strengthen our country and set us on the path to a clean energy future.

And she calls on each of us to take up paper and pen to urge Congress to act.

This is what I find so inspiring about Beinecke's book. I believe that the act of making our voices heard is the best of American politics. I have seen it work time and again -- I have seen citizens, neighborhoods, entire communities carry the weight of truth to our lawmakers. But in order to succeed, we must raise our voices loudly and fully. This is what Beinecke moves us to do.

I have known Beinecke for more than 35 years, and I admire her unwavering commitment to protecting the environment. Beinecke's dedication and intelligence make her a formidable fighter, but she is also an optimist. She trusts that green solutions and smart policies can diffuse the climate crisis. And she believes that we can create a cleaner, healthier planet for our children.

This is the spirit that infuses her book. Beinecke writes:

This book is a call to action, one citizen's honest appeal. It is not a political treatise. It is not a partisan screed. Maybe that's because my politics on this are simple. I believe Democrats and Republicans alike have a real chance here to lead, to look to the future and show us the way to a brighter future.

Two centuries ago, Paine wrote, "I offer nothing more than simple facts, plain arguments, and common sense." That's precisely the approach Beinecke has taken in her stand against climate change. Simple facts, plain arguments, and common sense. It's all there in her book.

Jennifer Grayson: Eco Etiquette: How To Eat Local This Winter

2009-11-11T15:55:43Z

For those of us in the Midwest, summer is so much easier when it comes to eating local -- lots of farmers markets stocked with goodies from local growers, bakers and purveyors. Now those little meccas of low-impact food are closed for the season. Any suggestions for how we can continue to lesson our impact on the environment as we head back indoors for our grocery shopping?

-Maggie

Say what you will about the smog and traffic in Los Angeles, but it's pretty darn fantastic to be able to pedal on over to my local farmer's market year-round. That's one of the advantages of living in sun-soaked California, the nation's breadbasket. San Joaquin Valley, to the north, produces nearly half of all the fruits, nuts, and vegetables sold in the United States (though that number has declined in the past three years due to drought); San Diego County, to the south, has more farms than any other county in the country.

These agricultural tidbits went largely unnoticed by me until a trip to Boston in the dead of winter a few years back, after I had already moved out West, when I realized that it was only in LA that grocery stores offered almost entirely local produce; even the Beantown Whole Foods I visited featured -- you guessed it -- California's finest fruitage.

Believe it or not, you don't have to live in the Golden State to enjoy farm-fresh food 365 days a year; there are winters farmers markets, even in some darn-cold areas of the country. The Chicago Green City Market, for example, runs year-round, and will feature 47 vendors this winter. But just because farmers markets elsewhere are closing up shop doesn't mean you should just throw in the CO2 towel and start buying anemic-looking tomatoes and asparagus that have been flown in from Chile to the local Jewel. Want to know how to procure farm-fresh, local food even in a four-foot snowstorm? The answer is as simple as C-S-A.

For those who aren't familiar with community supported agriculture (CSA), it's pretty much like buying a subscription to a local farm: You pay a fee, usually per growing season, and in return receive a share of fresh, locally nurtured fruits and vegetables -- some farms even offer dairy, eggs, and meat. The great thing about a CSA is that you enjoy whatever is in season: Depending on where you live, that can mean spring peas and asparagus in April; strawberries and corn in July; and apples and sweet potatoes in October.

With the spread of the local, organic food movement, CSAs have become very popular in recent years; so much so that many are now offering winter goodies to help keep their shareholders happy and not-so-fat (thanks to nutritious eating). A friend who recently finished an internship with Illinois' Cedar Valley Sustainable Farm told me that selective freezing enables the farm to offer its pasture-raised chicken and humanely bred Angus beef even throughout a brutal Chicago winter.

I did a survey of CSAs around the country and found that surprisingly, winter offerings can be quite diverse: Garden of Eve's farm share on the East End of Long Island includes stored vegetables like beets, rutabagas, and winter squash, as well as organic eggs; Laughing Stock Farm in Freeport, Maine, offers fresh salad greens and baby carrots from its greenhouse (which is heated with a renewable fuel, of course); and Hog's Back Farm in Arkansaw, Wis., delivers cold-hardy crops like broccoli and kale to pick-up sites in nearby Minneapolis and St. Paul. To search for a CSA that offers a winter share in your area, check out the LocalHarvest website. But don't wait -- many are already sold out for the season.

Reducing your carbon footprint and supporting good health are important reasons to join a CSA, but I think an equally compelling consideration right now is to support your local farmers -- and your community -- through this economic winter.

Send all your eco-inquiries to Jennifer Grayson at eco.etiquette@gmail.com. Questions may be edited for length and clarity.

Rob Perks: Veterans, Clean Energy, and Common Sense

2009-11-11T15:53:11Z

Another Veterans' Day is upon us, a time to reflect on our armed servicemen and women who are stationed around the world to protect us. Many of these brave soldiers, sailors and marines have spent years serving in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere, selflessly putting their lives on the line for their families, friends and fellow countrymen here at home. While I honor their duty and courage, frankly I'm not happy that our nation's dependence on foreign oil is partly to blame for putting our soldiers in harm’s way.

There’s a growing consensus among our troops, military leaders and national security experts that one of the best things we can do to enhance our national security is to get off fossil fuels and transition to clean, home-grown energy. If America shifts to renewable alternatives -- like wind, solar and geothermal -- we can significantly reduce our dangerous addiction to oil, which currently costs our country $1 billion per day.

That’s why I'm so glad that a group of veterans, led by Operation Free, launched a bus tour across America. Their stated mission: promote clean energy! These vets, after serving our country overseas, volunteered to spend two weeks travelling through nearly 70 cities and towns in 22 states. My NRDC colleague, Rocky Kistner, rode along on one of the buses and blogged about his experiences and observations along the way. Here’s an excerpt from his last blog:

Although it was a grueling schedule with tight quarters at times, we developed a camaraderie that made the trip a rewarding experience. I also gained a special insight into why these veterans took the time to make this tour. All were motivated to help humanity deal with one of the most serious threats civilization has ever known. But there was also another important reason -- no one wanted to put a single service member in harm's way due to the international security threats posed by climate change.

Looking back, I will remember most our stops at veterans' war memorials along the way. This was "hallowed ground," as Army vet Rafael Noboa described it, a testament to the lifelong service each veteran gives his or her country. Many said this tour was one of the most important battles of their military careers. It was an honor to serve beside them.

You can watch a video from the bus tour here (also on Rocky’s blog).

This week, the group VoteVets.org launched a television ad campaign aimed at getting the Senate to pass a clean energy and climate bill. The ads are airing in West Virginia, Indiana and Missouri. (Previously, versions of this ad ran in Michigan, North Carolina, and Virginia). These ads coincide with a growing movement by veterans and security groups making a push on Capitol Hill to get a bill passed and on to President Obama for his signature. Check out the ads:

WEST VIRGINIA

INDIANA

MISSOURI

This week also marks the release of NRDC President Frances Beinecke’s new book, Clean Energy Common Sense, in which she explains why America needs to move to clean energy to protect our planet and increase our national security.

In her book, Frances quotes leaders like four-star General Anthony Zinni (ret.), U.S. Navy Admiral Lee Gunn (ret.), and CIA Director Leon Panetta. These are experts with unquestioned authority on national security and who know what it means to put young people on the front lines. They know the price we pay due to our reliance on oil and the opportunity we have by shifting to a clean energy future.

Veterans of America, on a mission to support a clean energy future, we salute you!

This post originally appeared on NRDC's Switchboard blog.

30 Rock, Biggest Loser And Other NBC Shows Go Green

2009-11-11T15:43:40Z

NEW YORK — NBC gives new meaning to the phrase "green screen" next week, spreading a pro-environmental message across five of its prime-time entertainment programs.

"30 Rock," where Al Gore takes a cameo role, leads the way. Environmental themes were also added to the scripts of "The Biggest Loser," "The Office," "Heroes" and "Community."

NBC Universal's three-year "green" campaign has largely focused on off-camera issues like making company facilities more eco-friendly. News and information programs have also been enlisted to do stories on environmental issues, but except for one "30 Rock" episode two years ago, the campaign hasn't touched the prime-time lineup.

This year on "30 Rock," corporate boss Jack Donaghy tells the late-night show's staff it has to cut its carbon footprint by 5 percent, and puts Kenneth the Page in charge of getting it done.

"It's something that is relatable and is something that a lot of people are doing," said Jack McBrayer, the actor who portrays Kenneth.

Backstage, the show has done its part by removing water bottles in favor of water filters and using chemical-free cleaning products. The show rents hybrid vehicles to transport its actors and crew members, said Beth Colleton, vice president of the "Green is Universal" campaign.

"Everybody is on board with greening up the place and being more environmentally-friendly in real life," McBrayer said. "Every now and then people need to be reminded of things that can be done."

In the comedy "Community," the college is renamed "Environdale." College students think they're hiring the band Green Day for a gig, and instead gets the Celtic combo Greene Daeye. Dwight in "The Office" takes the role of "Recyclops" in that comedy. "Heroes" features cast members filling a truck with recyclables and talking about the importance of giving back to the earth.

Trainers on "The Biggest Loser" will instruct their clients to buy organic produce and bring their own mugs to the coffee shop.

Colleton said there was no attempt to be heavy-handed and interfere with the creative process.

"We make sure we don't dictate to the show," she said. Producers decide the best way to absorb the message in a way that's appropriate for their audiences, she said.

NBC News is also involved next week. The "Today" show will have a series on cost-efficient ways for families to live greener lives. Anne Thompson will do environmental stories from Greenland, Denmark and Arizona on "Nightly News," and David Gregory will bring up the topic on "Meet the Press."

Activities on NBC Universal's cable properties include hosts on The Weather Channel advising viewers to turn down their thermostats.

Green screens, by the way, are blank screens on news sets upon which video or maps are projected.

___

NBC and NBC Universal are units of General Electric Co.

AUEs: Miniature Robots To Swarm The Oceans For Science

2009-11-11T15:36:37Z

Swarms of soup-can-sized robots will soon plunge into the ocean seeking data on poorly understood phenomena from currents to biology.