This blog's purpose is to connect in an every widening and deepening manner with others across the globe in support of the United Nation's Millennium Development Goals.
The Union of Concerned Scientists is warning us that We can't let politics get in the way of swift climate action and are asking that we write our senator today. Please tell your senators to urge Senate leadership to act now to break this impasse.
This week, Senators John Kerry (D-MA), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) were on the verge of introducing climate and energy legislation when a political disagreement between Graham and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) led to an unnecessary delay.
Senate leadership must not to let political differences on unrelated issues impede swift passage of comprehensive climate and energy legislation. Please tell your senator to urge Senate leadership to act now to break this impasse.
Take Action Today! Sincerely, Kate Abend National Field Organizer UCS Climate and Energy Program
It is easy enough to take this action as they provide you the basic language for the email. I know that both my two senators have supported these efforts so I recognize that when I write to them. I also make it a habit to throw in something about the Millennium Development Goals in this case Millennium Goal 7. Environmental Sustainability. Here is my letter.
Dear Senator
I know that you have done a tremendous amount of work in this area already. Yet despite the latest science pointing to ever more dire and costly consequences of global warming we still can't come to a consensus for action even in our own country. What hope does the world then have to achieve global goals such as environmental sustainability under the Millennium Development Goals. We can't afford to wait any longer for passage of comprehensive climate and energy legislation.
The federal report, Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States, warns that unabated global warming will likely lead to water shortages, loss of species, hazards to coasts from sea level rise, and an increase in severity of extreme weather events. The latest science indicates that spring is now arriving 10 days earlier and that there will be much greater sea level rise than previously expected.
The tireless work of Senators John Kerry, Lindsey Graham, and Joseph Lieberman is proof that bipartisan success is well within reach. We have never been so close to putting this country on track to dramatically cut heat-trapping emissions and jumpstart a clean energy economy.
I am asking you to keep pressing forward on this very important issue.
Both Henry Chu of the Los Angeles Times and the Economist provided articles stating, scientists in "climategate" did not fudge the data, a report finds.
The experts find 'no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice' by the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, which had been accused of misrepresenting global warming data. >>
The inquiry panel looked at 11 CRU publications from the past 20 years, spent days talking to the researchers and looking at other documentation, and concluded that if there was any malpractice at CRU they would have detected it. They found no such thing. Instead they found "dedicated if slightly disorganised researchers ill-prepared for public attention".
I also learned that she does not support efforts from industrial state Democratic Senators to pre-empt state and local laws that regulate carbon emissions.
I am pleased to inform you that on April 1, 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation announced new national fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for cars. These new standards are an historic step forward, and I applaud the Obama Administration for making reductions of harmful GHG emissions a priority.
The new standards apply to new passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles, for model years 2012 through 2016. By 2016, new vehicles would have to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide (CO2) per mile and 35.5 miles per gallon (mpg), a significant improvement over the current national fuel efficiency standard.
The new federal standards, which are based on the clean car standards pioneered by California, will save consumers money at the gas pump due to higher fuel efficiency while reducing our dangerous dependence on foreign oil. EPA projects that over the lifetime of 2012-2016 model year vehicles, the new rules would reduce U.S. GHG emissions by 960 million metric tons and save 1.8 billion barrels of oil.
As Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, I have worked hard on our fight against carbon pollution. Be assured, I will continue working with my colleagues in Congress and the Obama Administration to move meaningful legislation forward to create clean energy jobs, reduce carbon pollution, and reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil.
Thank you for your past correspondence on this matter. Please feel free to write to me in the future about this or any other issue of concern to you.
"The earth is in greater peril than ever, but there is also unprecedented opportunity to build a new future. Earth Day has the power to bring about historic advances in climate policy, renewable energy and green jobs and catalyze millions who make personal commitments to sustainability - “A Billion Acts of Green” – mobilizing the power of people to create change by taking small steps in our homes, our schools and our businesses that add up to an enormous collective action." www.earthday.net/earthday2010
The Millennium Development Goal No. 7. Environmental Sustainability is to my mind the most global approach to climate change but it will be local efforts, all combining into national efforts that will make the difference cumulatively at the global level . One organization working hard for environmental sustainability for the whole earth is the Environmental Defense Fund, but especially here in the U.S.A.
This is the most critical moment we've ever faced in our effort to cap America's global warming pollution and unleash our clean energy future. It is not an exaggeration to say that the future of our planet hangs in the balance.
In the coming days and weeks, we will be focusing like never before on getting the Senate to act. And we continue to face stiff opposition from big polluters and other special interests, who are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to block action.
The math is daunting: there are only 10 working weeks left in the 111th Congress before the July 4th recess.
The Environmental Defense Fund is also working at my local level with the LA Apollo Alliance.
Nearly a year ago, EDF teamed with the LA Apollo Alliance to help pass the Green Retrofit and Workforce Development Ordinance that lays out a model and principles for investing in both local energy efficiency projects AND quality green jobs.
In December, the city earmarked $32 million in federal recovery dollars for this project, but implementation has stalled.The City Council took a positive step last month by approving the Renewable Energy Trust Fund, which guarantees city funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects needed to spark the creation of thousands of green jobs.
They needed to collect at least 1,200 signatures by April 16th to keep things moving forward. Here is to hoping that they made it.
My last post was on the arguments for climate change and my admitting to having little interest in engaging in the all to often flaming rhetoric that makes up the blogosphere. It is a different matter when our elected representatives are doing it, that we have to live with. The Environmental Defense Fund had warned us that Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) had submitted a "resolution of disapproval" that demanded opposition because of its intention to eliminate the Clean Air Act's ability to protect Americans from global warming.This attack would put public health at risk and jeopardize long-overdue action to hold the biggest polluters accountable, reduce America's oil dependence and jump-start a vibrant clean energy economy.The Supreme Court ruled that global warming pollutants are covered by the Clean Air Act and the EPA has begun carrying out the law by taking steps to limit global warming pollution from vehicle and from large power plants and factories.
Fortunately, I have two Senators who support my views on the environment and work to make positive change. I am going to include the information that they provided me in its entirety even though the general rule of blogging is not to have overly lengthy posts.
From Senator Barbara Boxer
Dear Mr. Dowling: Thank you for writing to me in opposition to a proposal that could overturn the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) global warming endangerment finding. I share your opposition to this proposal.
As you may know, on December 7, 2009, the EPA issued a finding that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare. However, there are efforts underway to curtail the EPA's authority by repealing the agency's finding. I believe that such efforts are misguided and would greatly undermine the Clean Air Act, a landmark environmental law that has safeguarded the air we breathe for decades.
Debating over what to do about unchecked global warming is fair, and the Senate will continue to evaluate the best tools for addressing greenhouse gas emissions, but repealing an endangerment finding based upon years of work by America's leading scientists and public health experts is not appropriate. On January 11, the Majority Members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) united together in opposition to the effort to overturn EPA's endangerment finding and urged all of our Senate colleagues to do the same. I believe that my colleagues and I will be successful in blocking this ill-conceived proposal.
Throughout my tenure in Congress and now as Chairman of EPW, I have worked to uphold our important environmental laws and lead the way in our fight against global warming. In my continuing efforts, Senator John Kerry and I proudly introduced the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act (S.1733), which would establish strong greenhouse gas emission standards, promote clean energy, and create millions of new jobs. Our bill would also ensure that the Clean Air Act and other landmark environmental protections are not weakened as we work together to fight dangerous global warming.
S.1733 was passed by the EPW Committee on November 5, 2009, and provisions of our bill will now become part of a comprehensive clean energy and climate package for consideration by the full Senate. Be assured that I will work to defeat all attacks on our environmental protections and keep working to see a clean energy and climate change bill signed into law.
Again, thank you for writing to me. Please feel free to write to me in the future about this or any other issue of concern to you.
Barbara Boxer United States Senator
From Senator Feinstein
Dear Mr. Dowling:
Thank you for writing to express your opposition to efforts by Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) to reverse the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare, and block the EPA from regulating those emissions. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this issue, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.
As you may know, last year, Senator Murkowski proposed an amendment to the fiscal year 2010 Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-88) that would have prohibited the EPA from using any funds to enforce the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources. Although Senator Murkowski's amendment did not receive a vote, you may be interested to know that I spoke out against the amendment on the Senate floor and have included my remarks for your review.
Additionally, Senator Murkowski has introduced a resolution of disapproval (S.J. Res. 26) to prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, even though such regulation is necessary in order to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Massachusetts v. EPA decision in 2007. Under the Congressional Review Act, Congress has the authority to disapprove of a regulatory rule issued by an agency by enacting a joint disapproval resolution within 60 legislative days of receiving the rule. The resolution must be signed by the President in order to overturn a rule. Senator Murkowski has also indicated that she may offer a similar measure to limit federal action on climate change to legislation that would increase the national debt limit (H. J. Res. 45).
Please know that I share your support for taking strong action to address climate change, and I appreciate hearing your concern about efforts to weaken the EPA's regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act. In my view, the United States needs multiple tools to protect public health and the environment from the impacts of climate change. While I believe that regulating the largest greenhouse gas emitters under a new cap and trade system would be more effective and less expensive than regulating these sources under the existing Clean Air Act, I believe Congress must ensure that the EPA has tools to reduce emissions from large-scale emitters in the United States in a way that minimizes costs to consumers. Again, thank you for writing. If you have additional questions or comments, please contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841. Best regards.
Senator Dianne Feinstein
Statement in Opposition to the Murkowski Amendment #2530 H.R. 2996, the Interior Appropriations Bill September 24, 2009
Mrs. FEINSTEIN.
Mr. President, I know Senator Boxer, the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, has an hour reserved to come and speak.
First, I will respond to the comments of the distinguished Senator from Alaska. I hope she will understand there are many of us who have viewed her amendment with substantial alarm, for reasons that I thought I might spend a few moments speaking about.
Essentially, as I understood the amendment, which was blocked from coming to the floor, it attempted to prohibit the EPA from using any funds to enforce the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources.
The proponents have argued that their only goal was to protect small family-owned farms and businesses from overly burdensome regulations. Yet the amendment would have gone much further. In fact, it would actually exempt some of the Nation's largest commercial emitters from climate change regulation, including huge industrial facilities, such as power plants and refineries.
I am very pleased that this amendment is not before us today. The underlying rationale, as I understand it from the amendment, is groundless. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has made it clear that the agency will not use the Clean Air Act to regulate either small businesses or family-owned farms. I was prepared, should the amendment have come up, to put down a side-by-side amendment that would have clearly exempted any farm, as well as any business, that emits under 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year.
Let me point this out. Stationary industrial sources account for over half of the U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, according to EPA. These are the leading cause of climate change, and they must be reduced if we have any hope of containing the worst impact of climate change.The amendment would have hampered the administration's effort to tackle one of the biggest pieces of the emissions puzzle: large industrial facilities. It would have been a major setback.
Thirdly, the amendment would effectively overturn the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Massachusetts v. EPA. In that decision, the Court found that the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to determine whether the emissions of greenhouse gases may be reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or welfare and then comply with the Clean Air Act requirements designed to protect public health from dangerous pollution. Upon completion of an endangerment finding, the Clean Air Act requires EPA to control greenhouse gases from both stationary and mobile sources.
Many argue -- and I happen to agree -- that regulating the largest greenhouse gas emitters through new legislation, establishing a cap-and-trade system, would be more efficient and less expensive than regulating these sources under the existing Clean Air Act.But until Congress enacts climate change legislation, EPA has a legal obligation to follow the Clean Air Act. So if one does not want EPA to take action under the Clean Air Act, then this body should want to pass a cap-and-trade bill.
The chairman of the EPW Committee, Senator Boxer, has been working very hard to put together a bill which has an opportunity to pass this Senate.
The point is, if we do not want the Clean Air Act to prevail, then the cap-and-trade bill is the only way to go. That is a clear incentive for the Senate and the House to pass a bill.
EPA has released a draft endangerment finding which it is going to soon finalize. Yet the amendment would have blocked EPA from completing the endangerment finding and from complying with its legal obligations to protect public health. The repercussions would have been major. It means EPA would not be able to complete a joint rulemaking with the Department of Transportation to increase corporate average fuel economy, which we call CAFE, and create a tailpipe emissions standard for automobiles.
That would have been a major problem. It would block implementation of the 2007 fuel economy law which I authored with Senator Snowe and which took us a long time to get passed and enacted.
By undermining the negotiated agreement between States and the Obama administration, the Murkowski amendment would also have likely resulted in States moving forward with their own tailpipe emissions standards which automakers have fought for years as too onerous. This would have stopped California and 14 other States and the District of Columbia from moving forward with implementing tailpipe emissions standards.
This amendment is vigorously opposed by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which includes General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler, the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, and the United Auto Workers. To that end, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks a letter from the Auto Alliance and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, finally, the amendment would send the wrong signal to the rest of the world about the Senate's intentions on climate change. It would suggest that we want to ignore the clear imperative to act, despite the efforts of the administration to motivate the international community in advance of the Copenhagen summit.
There is some concern also about small emitters. EPA is not planning to regulate small emitters. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has clearly stated on several occasions that the agency will not regulate small emitters.
She said it in her confirmation hearings, she said it again at Senate budget hearings, and she reiterated that comment when she appeared before the Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee hearing on EPA's fiscal year 2010 budget just a few months ago.
In fact, Administrator Jackson has sent a draft deregulatory rule to the Office of Management and Budget for review which would establish clearly that all but the very largest sources of greenhouse gas will be preemptively exempted from the stationary source permitting requirements in the Clean Air Act.
She has no intention of regulating small sources that emit under 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide or any small farm. 25,000 metric tons is a very high threshold. According to EPA, it is equivalent to the emissions from burning 131 trainloads of coal per year -- these would be exempted -- or burning 2.8 million gallons of gasoline annually. The 25,000-ton threshold would exempt every small source, focusing only on 13,000 of the largest emitters in the United States.
Let me say that again. The 25,000-ton threshold which EPA intends to proceed with, and which my side-by-side amendment would have had as one of the two criteria, would exempt every small source, focusing only on the 13,000 largest emitters in the United States. EPA intends to only regulate the largest facilities, and these facilities are, almost without exception, already regulated under the Clean Air Act for emissions of other pollutants such as soot, smog-forming nitrous oxides, or acid-rain-inducing sulfur dioxide. Let me now explain why the Murkowski Amendment would impact the joint EPA-Department of Transportation rulemaking on automobile greenhouse gas emissions.
This rulemaking is of critical importance, and the regulation implementing this law was negotiated by the White House in cooperation with automakers, the States, and labor. But according to a letter I received from EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson last night, the impact of the Murkowski amendment "would be to make it impossible for the EPA to promulgate the light-duty vehicle greenhouse-gas emissions standards that the agency proposed on September 15, 2009."
She writes: Because of the way the Clean Air Act is written, promulgation of the proposed light-duty vehicle rule will automatically make carbon dioxide a pollutant subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act for stationary sources, as well as for light-duty vehicles. The only way that EPA could comply with the prohibition in Senator Murkowski's amendment would be to not promulgate the light-duty vehicle standards."
These standards are something Senator Snowe and I have worked for at least 7 years now, beginning with the SUV loophole and ending with the bill that became law, would be totally undermined. By undermining the negotiated agreement between States, the amendment would also likely result in States moving forward with their own tailpipe emissions standards.
As I indicated before, in 2002 California enacted a landmark law to reduce tailpipe emissions standards by 30 percent for all new sedans, trucks, and SUVs by 2016. I also stated that 14 other States -- namely, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia -- have adopted or announced their intention to adopt California's greenhouse gas emissions controls.
The amendment would have been a major roadblock in efforts to improve fuel economy standards for vehicles. I don't think we can bury our head in the sand when it comes to climate change.
I would like to conclude by reminding my colleagues that it makes no sense at this particular point in time to put on the floor a major amendment which well could have devastated both the EPA and any effort to get to cap-and-trade legislation when, in fact, the EPW Committee is struggling to write a comprehensive bill which has an opportunity to pass this body.
Again I say, if people do not want the Clean Air Act prevailing, then the only way you can do that is with a cap-and-trade bill. That is the way the committee of this body is proceeding. I believe it is the correct way.
I believe our Nation is in serious jeopardy, as is the rest of planet Earth, with global warming. I believe it is real. Just this week, the Journal Nature published a new paper that found rapid deterioration of the ice sheets on Greenland and Antarctica. Yesterday on this floor, I showed the deterioration in the Arctic. I showed the deterioration in Greenland. I showed the deterioration in the Chukchi Sea. I showed the deterioration off Barrow, AK. It is happening all over the world.
The Flat Earth Society cannot prevail. I think there is a real danger signal out there for planet Earth. We know we cannot reverse it. We know that greenhouse gases do not dissipate and go away after a period of time in the atmosphere. We now know these gases that began during the Industrial Revolution are still present in the atmosphere, and we know that the Earth is not immutable, that it can change. We look at other planets and we see that they have changed over the millennia. What we do here to protect our planet Earth for the next generations is so key and critical.
This discussion has to be joined in an appropriate way, and an appropriate way is when a cap-and-trade bill is produced by the Environment and Public Works Committee and the chairman of that committee is on this floor and the bill is open for amendments and there is a free flow of debate and discussion.
I believe the science is real. I pointed out yesterday we have a project in intelligence whereby the satellites are tracking deterioration in the ice shelves of the world. I hope to present more of that information when there is a bill on the Senate floor.
Sincerely yours, Dianne Feinstein United States Senator
This is one of my standard reblog posts made up of rehashed and mashed up info enhanced with additional links. My self serving intention is to combine information from a variety of sources and come up with a better understanding of a particular issue.
Millennium Development Goal 7. Environmental Sustainability has been of focus of this blog before and it is easily the most controversial. This blog does not bother to get involved in the arguments in the believe that it does not actually move anything forward. Instead it takes the view that the more information that gets out there, the more likely that more people will understand and understanding does lead to change. Still, one can't completely ignore the climate change deniers, and in specific circumstances there are viable arguments to be consider against particular aspects of climate change. One good example of such a discussion is here at MITWorld's The Great Climategate Debate. These are venues for finding solutions rather that engaging in vehement political rhetoric.
I have notice one aspect of many of the anti-climate change crowd and that is the tendency to treat the threat of climate change as a singular argument consisting of a few untested assumptions being put forward a small minority whose intentions are suspect and fraught with deception. A few well placed logical insights, usually based on political premises that are beyond questioning, and the whole facade folds. One biting comment from a blog of no greater reputation than this one sends the scientific climate change cronies scurrying for cover.
Leaving the climate change debate for a second, as an municipal economic development professional I do see the 21st century being a clean energy century and America falling behind in this business opportunity without any need to even bring up the topic of climate change. I also stand with the side that says climate change is a self-inflicted experiment that we cannot take a chance on being wrong about.
Slight changes in the climate may trigger abrupt threats to ecosystems that are not easily reversible or adaptable, such as insect outbreaks, wildfire, and forest dieback. "More vulnerable ecosystems, such as those that already face stressors other than climate change, will almost certainly reach their threshold for abrupt change sooner." US Geological Survey
South Asian monsoons, the Amazon rain forest and polar sea ice -- all significant environmental systems that control and regulate the climate of the entire planet -- could each serve as the site of an environmental tipping point as global temperatures rise, according to this article. Scientists are unable to predict the consequences of tipping-element changes to the Bodélé Depression in Chad or the Gulf Stream in the Atlantic Ocean, though changes to these systems have already been recorded.
This is only the tip of the proverbial icebergbut it is enough to keep me firmly in the camp that says climate change cannot be ignored.
Yet merely agreeing or acquiescing to the position that climate change is a reality is not enough. The EDF tells us that we have an historic opportunity to cap America's global warming pollution and put people back to work building America's clean energy future. We need your help to make sure the Senate gets the message: The time for climate action is now! Take action to deliver this message to your Senators.
President Obama says that our environmental and economic renewal "starts with a cap and trade" system to deal with global warming. But he needs the support of Congress to achieve this historic goal this year. Please take action now
I agreed to do a post on the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in support of OXFAM efforts. They came up with a pretty intense video to convince people to sign the petition against global warming. This is another Bloggers Unite effort. My current struggles at work meant that a number of draft posts are going by the wayside but I am putting together a post from a number of sources hopefully covering where everything ended up, kinda of.
When I woke up this morning the New York Times was reporting
President Obama called on world leaders to move swiftly to address climate change, and, in a direct challenge to China, pressed for a global climate change accord to include a way to monitor whether countries are complying with promised emissions cuts.
The World leaders went through the final hours of direct negotiations. The UK Prime Minister has directly appealed to Avaaz to build the tidal wave of public pressure needed to reach a deal that stops catastrophic global warming of 2 degrees.
"What you're doing through the internet around the world is absolutely crucial to setting the agenda. In the next 48 hours, don't underestimate your effect on the leaders here in Copenhagen"
UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown
On an emergency conference call with 3000 Avaaz member
They came up with 13,788,513 in response.
Archbishop Desmond Tutu told hundreds of delegates and assembled children:
"We marched in Berlin, and the wall fell. "We marched for South Africa, and apartheid fell. "We marched at Copenhagen -- and we WILL get a Real Deal."
President Obama also spoke. "We are ready to get this done today but there has to be movement on all sides to recognize that it is better for us to act than to talk. Better for us to choose action over inaction; the future over the past. With courage and faith, I believe that we can meet our responsibilities to our people, and to the planet."
A frustrated U.S. President Barack Obama addressed U.N. climate talks in Copenhagen on Friday and urged countries to accept an agreement, even if imperfect, though he stopped short of promising new U.S. emissions cuts. "No country will get everything that it wants," he said.
Perhaps when it comes to the very real possibility that COP15 may be a virtual failure, Time magazine said it best:
The failure of the summit may be a blessing in disguise, because when it comes to dealing with climate change, the last thing we need right now is yet another empty agreement and yet more moral posturing.
The Time article also said that the focus needs to shift from “trying to make fossil fuels more expensive” to “making alternative energy cheaper.” In short, we need a new industrial revolution
I am still trying to absorb it all and figure out what it all means.
Bad news first, I am way behind doing posts for this blog and the situation with Copenhagen and the smoking e-mails has been moving too fast for me to keep up. Good news, before I was overwhelmed at work I was able to get my two cents in through a number of the organizations this blog supports. Better yet, all those emails from activists and slacktivists alike seems to have made a difference so the good people from CARE have let me know. I know that Avaaz (235,980 last count trying for 240,000) and 350.org are continuing the campaign and taking it to the streets of Copenhagen and streets around the world. Even if I can't keep up like I would like hopefully others can.
Dear Brian,
Thank you for sending a letter to President Obama encouraging him to personally attend the United Nations Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen.
You made a difference! Thanks in part to your efforts, the president will be attending the conference. The White House statement confirming President Obama's presence said, ''The president believes it is possible to reach a meaningful agreement in Copenhagen. ''The announcement also called President Obama's decision, ''a sign of his continuing commitment and leadership to find a global solution to the global threat of climate change.''
Your commitment helps make the world a brighter place for all, and I look forward to working with you again soon. Together, we are helping to create a world without poverty.
Sincerely, Helene D. Gayle, MD, MPH President and CEO
This is what I said beyond the template email plea to President Obama:
Whether they are afflicted because they are at the lowest rungs of the world economy or because they are one of the low lying nations facing extinction from global warming people or in danger of dying or barely surviving. It is the failure of the majority of nations not to have the political will to come together and address the issues. They had the will to promise under the Millennium Declaration, but not the will to fulfill the promise in particular Millennium Development Goal 7 Environmental Sustainability. COP15 would be a step in the right direction if nations put aside their own particular interests and look to the good of the planet.
We have a chance to take a positive leadership role in the world and bring needed change. We are now suffering from an international economic crisis and global climate damage. One billion are in even greater danger of overwhelming disaster. We have the greatest resources at our disposal on the planet, so we should take up the greatest responsibility. It is going to take a global effort and we should be a significant part.
I have said before that Senator Boxer is a leader in the Senate when it comes to environmental legislation. Some of her most significant work as been on the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act (S.1733). Below is a some history on the bill from its latest passage out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to her original remarks introducing the bill.
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee passed a climate and energy bill sponsored by Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and John Kerry (D-MA).
Th Environmental Defense Fund reminds us that Chairman Boxer and her colleagues deserve great credit for their commitment to move forward on solving our climate and energy challenges.
encouraged by the announcement yesterday that Senators Kerry, Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) will work together to craft a bipartisan bill to bring America greater energy independence and cap pollution.
Dear Friend:
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which I chair, has opened an intensive three-day schedule of legislative hearings on the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, S.1733, a bill aimed at creating new, clean energy jobs, reducing our dependence on foreign oil, and curbing the production of greenhouse gases. I am pleased to share with you my opening statement, available at this link. If you would like to see all of the testimony from the hearings, and see video or a live feed, please use this link.
Sincerely,
Barbara Boxer United States Senator
Dear Mr. Dowling:
Thank you for writing to me in support of clean energy legislation to fight climate change. I appreciate hearing from you.
I want to share with you the statement I made when Senator John Kerry and I introduced the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act (S.1733).
Sincerely,
Barbara Boxer
United States Senator
Senator Boxer's statement on the introduction of "The Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act" on September 30, 2009:
I am very pleased to stand with my colleagues, national security leaders, veterans, business leaders, workers, environmental organizations, religious leaders, wildlife protectors, energy companies, state and local officials and so many others as we introduce the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act.
This bill addresses major challenges of our generation:
.protecting our children and the earth from dangerous pollution;
.putting America back in control of our energy future;
.creating the policies that will lead to millions of new jobs; and
.through our example, inspiring similar actions around the world to avoid an unstable and dangerous future.
As Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I want to thank so many of my colleagues and their staffs, on and off the committee.
Senator Kerry's staff and my office have been a team, working together for weeks and weeks, and often late into the night. Colleagues and staff on the EPW Committee have been very important in this effort and their work is reflected.
We built on the successful House effort. Our bill has stronger targets in the short term and we have expanded our coalition in the business community.
In our bill, the basic promise to consumers has been kept. The promise to regions that rely heavily on fossil fuels has been kept as well.
The first major part of the bill includes authorizations, all of which would be eligible for appropriations and some which are eligible for both appropriations and allowances.
Some of these are enhanced from the Waxman bill; some are new. Here are some examples of these authorizations:
Investments in clean natural gas, new transmission infrastructure, nuclear R&D and worker training, and green economic development;
Agricultural and forestry offset opportunities;
Provisions to speed the transition to cleaner transportation, including investments in our transit systems, and incentives for efficient hybrid and electric cars;
Adaptation authorizations that include wildfire prevention, flood control, water infrastructure, and investments in coastal communities and wildlife protection.
Our bill gives a much stronger role to mayors and local governments.
The second major part of our bill sets up the Pollution Reduction and Investment incentives.
In this section we have strong principles laid out for market transparency and oversight and we set up an Office of Offsets Integrity.
Allowances in this section will be detailed in the chairman's mark.
We have put into this section a soft collar to address cost containment and limit speculation while maintaining the environmental integrity of the pollution cap.
And our bill does not add one penny to the deficit.
In closing, let me say that my state of California is going through hard times right now and it weighs on me every day.
But there is one bright spot. And that is clean energy jobs and businesses.
The latest economic study predicts up to 1.9 million new jobs in America if we pass our bill.
We know clean energy is the ticket to strong, stable economic growth ...it's right here in front of us...in the ingenuity of our workers and the vision of our entrepreneurs. And in studies and models.
The global clean energy market is estimated to reach two and a half times the size of the global personal computer market by the year 2020.
We know from venture capitalists that billions of dollars from the private sector will flow into this market.
Others will move ahead if we don't seize this opportunity.
If we do, we will be a leader in the world as we protect the earth and all who dwell here from a future that the world's most respected scientists agree is threatened if we do not act.
No one knows what challenges will face them in their time.
No one chooses their time. But you know what? This is our time.
Global warming is our challenge.
Economic recovery is our challenge.
American leadership is our challenge.
Let's step up right now.
Let's not quit until we have fulfilled our responsibility to our children and our grandchildren.
I have done a few blogs discussing the upcoming Copenhagen meeting on Climate Change this December. So far things don't look optimistic, but as they say it is always darkest before the dawn. I am getting involved with another BloggersUnite event, this time 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, more on that in another post. There are numerous avenues to take action whether full activist and going to Copenhagen to protest or slacktivist and simply clicking a petition button. I am trying for something in between.
Failure at Copenhagen puts our planet on an unsustainable path. The questions of not now, when, if not us, who? cannot be ignored because it will not be the bottom billion of the world's economy that history will look to as they have no voice in this effort. It will be the leaders of the developed world and the leading economies who must answer. You have promised to work for the Millennium Development Goals, but none of the others matter if No. 7 Environmental Sustainability is not fulfilled.
Here are more reasons why from the Environmental Defense Funds (EDF).
With a climate bill pending in the Senate, the EDF tells us that they are doing everything we can to keep the pressure on for strong climate action.
Now is the time for the Senate to act. I strongly urge you to continue your ongoing leadership and support for strong climate bills and show our President that America is not only ready to support environmental legislation that helps our country, but that we are also ready to work with other countries to help heal our planet and create development that helps the bottom billion of the world's economy. The House has passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act, HR 2454. This historic bill will place a cap on carbon, invest in America's green energy future, create needed jobs, curb our global warming pollution, and help free us from foreign oil.We have an historic opportunity to cap global warming pollution and put people back to work unleashing America's green energy economy.
Here are some sobering facts about climate and water to inspire you to take action:
7: Number of great rivers in Asia fed by meltwater from Himalayan glaciers (Ganga, Indus, Brahmaputra, Salween, Mekong, Yangtze and Huang He).
2 billion: Number of people, mostly in India and China, who rely on meltwater from Himalayan glaciers for their fresh water.
2035: Date by which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and India's Energy and Resources Institute predict that much of the Himalayas could be glacier free.
66%: Amount by which the July-September flows would be reduced in the Ganga River if we lose the Himalayan glaciers.
37%: Amount of India's irrigated land is located in the Ganga region.
1 and 2: Respective rank of China and India as the world's producers of wheat and rice, food staples for all of humanity.
What Would Failure at Copenhagen Mean for the Poor and Developing Nations?
The Care2 Petitionsite reminds us that we need to protect the poor and vulnerable around the world from the effects of climate change. They are asking that we help the poor with the effects of climate change. ». Currently, they are at 6,744 with a goal of 10,000. I am 6,747. My two cents are below:
We are destroying our planet for us all, which is bad enough, we are also putting the greatest cost on the poor. Our governments need to be reminded that these funds are only a small down payment on what was promised in term of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals and especially 7. Environmental Sustainability. It is not money that is so desperately needed now, it is political will and global collaboration.
The fact that they are the ones least responsible for the changes in our environment and yet they are likely to suffer its worst consequences has been established previously in this blog under the post the Ugly of the Good, the Bad and The Ugly of Climate Change
There is funding set aside in the House's climate change bill to help poor people adapt to the effects of global warming, but at 1 percent of available resources, it falls short. What's needed is another $3.5 billion for international adaptation programs.
From Scientific American: This is the consequence of failure at Copenhagen: A marked shift in scientific effort from solving global warming to adapting to its consequences, a hodge-podge of uncoordinated local efforts to trim emissions - none of which deliver the necessary cuts - and an altered climate.
Climate experts, scientists and negotiators say that, absent international agreement, the children and grandchildren of those living today will negotiate a world where planetary geo-engineering is a part of daily life, sea-walls defend coastal cities, the world's poor are hammered by drought, floods and famine and our planet is heading toward conditions unseen for the last 100 million years. MORE
One of the reasons the Barcelona talks were not a rousing success is because the U.S. refused to offer targets for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions. Jonathan Pershing, chief U.S. negotiator, said little when questioned by reporters about U.S. targets. “I have no information to share with you on that… We are studying this question. It's a decision that is yet to be made.”
She, like I am, not very optimistic about the chances of a legally binding treaty coming out of Copenhagen in December.
The Earth Negotiations Bulletin reported that some delegates at climate change talks last week in Barcelona were “contemplating the increasingly clear high-level messages that a legally binding agreement at COP 15 will not be possible." The Chair at B Barcelona, John Ashe, from Antigua and Barbuda, said that progress was “less than desirable.”
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has laid out his benchmarks for success at the upcoming international climate change talks in Copenhagen, calling on developed and developing countries to do all they can do to cut emissions. But as Stop Global Warming guest blogger Mike Smith notes, it may be too early for Ban Ki-Moon to count on the Obama administration to dance to the same climate change rhythm. (Read more)
Finally, from TED Video, Yann Arthus-Bertrand has captured thefragilebeauty of the Earth. Through video and film, his latest projects bind together ecology and humanism.
Climate Change or for this blog Millennium Development Goal 7. Environmental Sustainability is the issue with the most significant impacts both nationally and globally. It is not enough for us to get our own environmental house in order, we must also work to Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources, across the planet. We cannot lead, however, if we don't start first with ourselves.
The idea of creating a clean energy economy is starting to become more of a reality in America. Far more so than it was in 2007 when I first started dealing with this issue, though far more sceptically than now. This blog and Web 2.0 have been an important factors in the journey from that point to this.
One particular aspect of interest has been the ability of organizations to use the power of Web 2.0 to enhance collaboration. The challenge has been how to move from the virtual world to the everyday real world, while still maintaining the connections. Often these efforts are somewhat parallel with feedback. People sign up and coordinate collectively, act individually as groups geographically separated, and report in collectively. The Stand Up Take Action End Poverty, and 350.org global wide efforts are examples. These efforts are time-specific to create maximum affect on a specific issue at a specific time to create maximum exposure for press coverage.
The Wall is a place where literally thousands and thousands of people committed to a revolutionary new energy future for our nation and the world are coming together -- to express our hopes, share our resolve, and step up to a leadership role in building a grassroots movement for change like nothing America has ever seen. It's an opportunity for you to be part of the climate movement in a new way, in a way that takes us beyond ourselves.
I am still uncertain how effective this progressive "shock and amaze" or "shock and annoy" is really. It can be great for inspiring the true believers, but how effective it is moving the mainstream majority is still an open question. A better approach may be the The Repower America Wall. The Wall is collaborative and primarily online. They are reaching out to the real world through main stream media outlets such as TV.
Watch our first national TV ad featuring the faces and voices of supporters like you.
In the coming weeks and months, the messages you add will be part of a groundbreaking new campaign that speaks directly to our elected leaders on the television stations they watch, the radio they listen to, and the newspapers they read. The more photos and videos and thoughts that you add, the more powerful The Wall will be.
Today's national ad begins an aggressive new phase of our campaign. With your passion and the power of your voice, we will break through on clean energy and overwhelm the powerful special interests who profit the most by blocking progress.
The language is inspiring, but this effort was made for slacktivists, of whom I am one. Individuals can decide their own level of activism and then create a combined story. The effort does not have an apparent end point, so it can continue to grow, perhaps even more organically than the 350.org, which appealed more to true activists.
Three days ago they reached over 15,000 supporters of a clean energy future who have posted a message on The Wall. The question is whether they will be able to reach a tipping point in regards to collective activism. If all those who support this effort join and convince those slightly less convinced then this take a cascading viral path, but people need to be aware of it and take at least the action of going online. Fortunately, those most likely to support this effort are also more likely to have the knowledge and initiative.
A growing demand for clean energy from all of us together sends a powerful message to our leaders: American support for clean energy is broad and deep.
We're beginning to break through. But to get our leaders to listen and make clean energy a reality, we must rise up in numbers to make our voices heard -- to overwhelm the voices clamoring for the status quo.
We're competing with powerful interests who are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to protect their profits and block clean energy reforms at the expense of our families, our jobs, and our planet.
With every new message you add to The Wall you demonstrate that the most powerful interest in this fight isn't the oil or the coal lobby -- it's the American people joining together, speaking as one, for a clean energy future.
Action on climate change is cheaper than inaction
-
Many are afraid that tackling climate change is going to be too costly. But
increasingly, studies are showing action will not just be cheaper than
inacti...
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sTV3rNFg1b0ecEsyK6elIOaVJyygwmVxp-QqAxNTEUVTsSNapfpdRmXJ_S5tvDIAitWFYUyPnANKUL2KnUllQzupkV-lnMmIkNk8eBLAH6ufUCuVnlUXaKCMj5ScgRcd35L_kPi4XOe7AOxbW94EkQ=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tJRTcHr2OEvOnQoxqc33Xf43R8rCHoKf3-0SIVWeCd_JfEejjlI-1tI8tJtXIpltqoS4PESOSLNkm7Q-ypn_m55LvBHosUWNUxxTeiSrXa7hwdZI5v1UERG1zaZCRWncxY8mkpwI9mFmxqXDHOQLn_=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vq-awrviROcgrCVXLPF2K6UWUDxopDI1pzRE3qx2u-jvqWFFmnl9c2xWqpLAA3iL3tWzab47w_0LoT7lSAzYpk8gYYoLeJa-6MjN4nxRF1J0_xXqN92lAimRX8UfNEO2hR5MSCfdyw3pLh3Qvpalg=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vb6UR-nlEbGwQqN737pvqICYZnQxDHbV_8w1HNMXRXQjEKZ2Ku6aGOkDvDP2S7LzQaOh1FExeTSMS_wtOKsQ48JPuC6JskzWnLqW40bcXBcT4R8m8OHEKXkcYxRxFvuPX6bNwfxA1RzOkEcddbx0w=s0-d)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_uPmuF3f8QV4I1lJLc74JYt-0ZOjiV0h7PACBsBEe5mAm_AnhViQ7rCWxkYk59dPuOp6yb7WB9dQIk-EmFDzU-tVKsDjxrK8gH6cOCVAMVXQsKTaycQNk4o5V2ujCPGcKtRfckWV6tlUnXx50bOEKiE=s0-d)
November 1990
December 2000
