|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 29th, 2008 Palin around: The eco-rundown on Alaska Guv. Sarah Palin, John McCain’s Veep pick.
*** Has pushed to build a natural-gas pipeline from Alaska’s North Slope Got the state legislature to pass a bill to provide each Alaskan $1,200 to help with energy costs Sued the Interior Department over its decision to list the polar bear as a threatened species Has proposed eliminating Alaska’s gas tax Has pushed to open Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling Has created a committee to forge Alaska’s climate-change strategy, and has made Alaska an observer (but not a member) of the Western Climate Initiative Opposes a windfall profits tax on oil companies Was the ethics commissioner of the Alaska Gas and Oil Conservation Commission from 2003 to 2004 Husband is an oil production operator for BP on Alaska’s North Slope Started Alaska’s Petroleum Systems Integrity Office, an oversight and maintenance agency for the state’s oil and gas equipment, facilities, and infrastructure Chairs the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, a multistate panel “that promotes the conservation and efficient recovery of domestic oil and natural gas resources while protecting health, safety and the environment” Believes intelligent design should be taught along with evolution in science classes *** Quotable quotes from Palin:
I thought when we hit $100 a barrel for oil it would have been a psychological barrier that would have caused Congress to reconsider, but they didn’t. Now we are approaching $200 a barrel. It’s nonsense not to tap a safe domestic source of oil. I think Americans need to hold Congress accountable on this one. *** Reactions to the pick. Obama campaign spokesperson Bill Burton: Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency. Governor Palin shares John McCain’s commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade, the agenda of Big Oil, and continuing George Bush’s failed economic policies — that’s not the change we need, it’s just more of the same. –
With the pick of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin for his running mate, John McCain’s race towards the Bush administration’s failed energy policy is now complete. John McCain was once willing to stand up to his own party, but now that he is running for President, he supports the same Bush policies and powerful special interests that put us in the grip of the oil companies. One of the last remaining independent policies putting him at odds with Bush was his opposition to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, yet he has now picked a running mate who has opposed holding Big Oil accountable and been dismissive of alternative energy while focusing her work on more oil drilling in a wildlife refuge and off of our coasts. Senator McCain has lost any chance of having a balanced or moderate ticket with this choice and has instead opted for the same, business-as-usual reliance on the outdated oil companies that has been the hallmark of the Bush-Cheney administration. On the third anniversary of the hurricane that knocked loose oil rigs and spilled millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf Coast that is bracing for another hit, McCain is sending a terribly indifferent message by selecting a candidate who only repeats Big Oil’s talking points. – Sarah Palin’s record is not extensive — just two years ago she was the mayor of a city of less than 10,000 people — but what her record indicates is troubling. This spring, she opposed the listing of polar bears as a ‘threatened’ species. She supports the brutal aerial hunting of wolves. And she has been a friend of Big Oil, opposing a windfall profits tax on the oil industry that could fund affordable clean energy for more Americans. Palin’s husband works for BP. – Unfortunately, with her support for drilling in the Arctic Refuge and off our coasts, Governor Palin will simply continue the failed policies of the Bush-Cheney Administration and their Big Oil friends — policies that could make us even more dependent on foreign oil. Governor Palin characterizes McCain’s flip-flop on drilling offshore as a positive step in his transformation from maverick to Big Oil’s best friend. She has implored McCain to change his position against drilling in the Arctic — something she will have plenty of opportunities to pursue as his running mate. *** Palin family values: Half (?) the family income is from BP, her husband separates the oil from the water up in the oil fields. A janitorial position? How much more does he make than the average oil worker because he is the governor’s hubby? http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog/_ar… … – Can’t wait to see Palin debating foreign policy and national security with Joe Biden. http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin by amazingdrx at 9:01 AM on 29 Aug 2008 – Natural Gas Can Save A Planet: The most significant achievement is the natural gas pipeline. Sarah Palin may have already saved the world, and was looking good while doing it. by jabailo at 9:02 AM on 29 Aug 2008 – Palin is scared: She looks to have stage fright. The professional cheering section in the crowd doesn’t match McBushies’ wooden delivery. Go shoot some dice, you anger management challenged gambling addict. http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin Could be part of “drill, drill, drill” They’re pushing the fact that she wants to open up ANWR, Alaska has oil, blah blah blah. I guess “drill, drill, drill” is the only thing that works for them, so they’ll push, push, push it. by Jon Rynn at 9:32 AM on 29 Aug 2008 40 billion NG pipeline To make us energy independent. More “Pickens” around at oil and gas bribery and GHG climate disaster. http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin Jabailo - huh? Fuel cells consuming natural gas can eliminate the burning problems of hydrocarbons and replace them with natural reactions leaving just water and needed energy. Natural gas is clearly better than coal from an environmental perspective, but suggesting that it will save the planet is no more accurate than suggesting that giving up hamburgers for bison-burgers makes you a vegetarian. by Sean Casten at 9:42 AM on 29 Aug 2008 She said, “…nuclea…nuke..you..ler weapons”. Almost said it the right way, but quickly reverted to industrial programming. Oh now you can shatter that glass ceiling women! So she says. Get two more supreme court justices appointed who want to put your reproductive rights back into the evangelical taliban era? http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin by amazingdrx at 9:47 AM on 29 Aug 2008 Nuclear: Nu-kyu-lar is now a recognized but not preferred alternative pronunciation by most dictionaries. I’m not happy about it either, but the day is past when you can smugly point it out as an error. by KenG at 10:01 AM on 29 Aug 2008 – biden is greener: biden = useful after the election by hapa at 10:10 AM on 29 Aug 2008 I’m with KenG And lest we get all cranky about it, it bears noting that no one gets upset about the fact that “comfortable” is even more consistently misprounced in the same way (e.g., with a letter swap in the middle). by Sean Casten at 10:11 AM on 29 Aug 2008 … said he chose her to help fight the special interests in Washington who spend tax dollars on stuff we don’t need or don’t want! “That’s not change we can believe in.” by wiscidea at 10:35 AM on 29 Aug 2008 Uh oh… Has anyone noticed that Dick Cheney hasn’t been around for a while? Perhaps he found a way to move his brain into a new body. by wiscidea at 10:37 AM on 29 Aug 2008 A woman for Republican Vice pres: Conservatives are like molasses. They slow down progressive ideas but in the end embrace them (if they turn out to be good ones). One day they may well have a lesbian VP but I’m not so sure about an atheist one. In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts–Protecting the biodiversity of our world – welfare queen: I get frustrated with folks from outside Alaska who come up and say, “You shouldn’t develop your resources.” And I get frustrated that all Alaskans get this fat dividend check from fossil fuels drilled mostly on federal land. Those proceeds belong to all of us. And I get frustrated at all Westerners who have this attitude of an aggressive beggar - GIMMIE MONEY! NOW! BUT DON’T YOU DARE TELL ME HOW TO LIVE! DON’T TELL ME WHAT TO DO! GO FUCK YOURSELF! Will somebody tell these yahoos once and for all, federal land does not belong to them. It belongs to the country.
This kind of Dark Age flat-earthism is empirical evidence that one is just a cretin. by Russ at 11:05 AM on 29 Aug 2008 Permalink | ### |
Printer Friendly
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 26th, 2008 Bona Biden: Why Biden is such an important pick for those who care about the climate. Catastrophic climate change is the primary preventable threat to the health and well-being of all Americans — as readers of this blog already understand and as pretty much everyone else will figure out in the coming years. Keeping total planetary warming as low as possible — ideally below 2°C, which it turn requires keeping atmospheric concentrations of CO2 below 450 ppm — will become the central organizing principle for all U.S. energy, environmental, economic, and international policy over the next two decades, and will almost certainly remain so for the next two centuries. While this is a long-term problem, “What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment,” as IPCC head Rajendra Pachauri warned last fall. The current oil drilling “debate” only underscores how hopeless the climate situation is until progressives occupy the White House. But — and this is where Biden comes in — even if that legislation is strong enough to put this country on the path towards rapid and deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, the entire U.S. effort will certainly fall apart if the next president is not able to negotiate a serious international treaty that encompasses all major emitters. Yet it has become increasingly clear in recent months that achieving a serious, binding international treaty is even more politically implausible a task than passing serious, binding domestic legislation. And that is because Russia has emerged as a country that is likely to be every bit as much an obstacle as China and the United States currently are. *** The Chinese challenge: I have written about China extensively already, and no one should underestimate the difficulty of getting them to embrace the necessary reductions in projected emissions and then in absolute emissions. But everyone I know who knows the country tells me that the Chinese leaders understand that global warming will be catastrophic for them — even if those leaders mistakenly believe they can “go back and solve climate change after they get rich,” which has been the standard procedure for how Western countries dealt with traditional environmental problems. Sadly, that approach won’t work with climate because the climate system almost certainly has tipping points. Also, the Chinese are capitalists and are already poised to become the leading producer of both solar PV and wind turbines. And they could run their entire country on baseload solar, if they figure out fast enough that it is the renewable with the biggest potential as a primary power source and if they return to their strong energy efficiency policies from decades past. I cling to the view that Chinese could be brought around if their customers all applied enough pressure to them — assuming of course that those customers, including us, are all prepared to take the necessary measures themselves, which is far from obvious. *** Russian recalcitrance: But Russia may be even more problematic, and not just because they are more self-destructively nationalistic than China (or us). Russia does not have a good solar resource. But they do have a lot of coal and oil — and they very much want to stake a claim to the rich oil resources in the Arctic. Moreover, they may (mistakenly) think global warming is good for them. Since it will create a navigable Arctic and open up “currently inaccessible energy resources,” no less an authority than The Economist has written, “warming is likely to make Russia richer rather than poorer.” Sad — but quite untrue, especially since we are on path to far overshoot any degree of warming that could possibly be beneficial to Russia. Perhaps the most important climatic tipping point is in Russia — the Siberian tundra. If that defrosts, then avoiding the equivalent of 1,000 ppm atmospheric concentrations of CO2 will be all but impossible. After all the tundra contains more carbon than the atmosphere does, and much of it would likely be released as methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Indeed, we have some evidence that may have already started. Russia does have a staggering amount of wind potential, but it tends to be in the sparsely populated areas. Russia will need to be convinced that some combination of nuclear, wind, and natural gas can provide all the power it needs, but the even harder task will be convincing them not to use all that oil and coal they have. Indeed, the great challenge for the world in the next three decades is not so much aggressively deploying low carbon technology — although that would not be easy it would certainly be straightforward both technologically and economically.
*** This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. ————— Who’s advising McCain on energy and climate? Greenwire has also published ($ub. req’d) a detailed list of who is advising McCain on energy and environment policies, which I am reprinting below the fold. By contrast, McCain’s campaign relies on a small group of longtime friends and advisers. Campaign staff would not comment on why their advisory team isn’t as large as Obama’s, but sources say the staff’s size reflects how frequently the Arizona senator departs from the Republican Party line on environment and energy issues. “I’m not sure a McCain EPA would look any different than an Obama EPA,” quipped Brian Kennedy, a former House Republican leadership aide. “He might even bring Carol Browner back.” The GOP bench is exceedingly thin on genuine green Republicans — and none of them are conservatives. Anyway, here is his team: *** Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 15th, 2008 From: Cindy Shogan, Alaska Wilderness League <action@alaskawild.org> Dear Pincas, Big Oil is serious about one thing – they want to keep us addicted to oil. Gas prices are through the roof, putting the pinch on our everyday lives. Yet while American consumers choose between food on the table and gas in the tank, Big Oil is raking it in. And they’re telling us that the only way to lower gas prices is to drill, drill, drill. It’s a vicious circle: High profits lead to high gas prices, which lead to more drilling and higher profits. This is no way to end our pain at the pump. Drilling in the Arctic or other special places in America can’t ease the pain and won’t cure our addiction to oil. Visit ShameOnBigOil.org and sign the petition to declare independence from Big Oil! Exxon recently reported second-quarter profits of $11.68 billion–the largest quarterly profit ever by a U.S. corporation. The rest of Big Oil followed suit. It’s no coincidence we’re paying record gas prices while they rake in record profits. Is it any wonder why a gallon of gas costs over $4? Yet Big Oil wants us to believe that drilling in the last untouched piece of America–the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge–is the solution to all our problems. Is there any limit to their greed? Shame On Big Oil! Is there anything they won’t do? Click here to sign… It’s time for our elected leaders to say NO to Big Oil and say YES to real solutions that help consumers and protect our last untouched wilderness places. Thanks for your help to keep Alaska and our public lands and waters across the country wild! Cindy Shogan Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 8th, 2008 The World Values Survey is available at: www.worldvaluessurvey.org www.happyplanetindex.org
See the Global HPI map: http://www.happyplanetindex.org/map.htm Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 6th, 2008 BBC News - Arctic Map, prepared by Durham University, shows dispute hotspots. Maritime jurisdiction and boundaries in the Arctic region. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/staging_site/… http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pd… British scientists say they have drawn up the first detailed map to show areas in the Arctic that could become embroiled in future border disputes. A team from Durham University compiled the outline of potential hotspots by basing the design on historical and ongoing arguments over ownership. The UK researchers hope the map will inform politicians and policy makers. “To be honest, most of the other maps that I have seen in the media have been very simple,” he added. Energy security is driving interest, as is the fact that Arctic ice is melting more and more during the summer. Martin Pratt, Durham University. The team used specialist software to construct the nations’ boundaries, and identify what areas could be the source of future disputes. “All coastal states have rights over the resources up to 200 nautical miles from their coastline,” Mr Pratt said. “So, we used specialist geographical software to ‘buffer’ the claims out accurately.” The researchers also took into account the fact that some nations were able to extend their claims to 350 nautical miles as a result of their landmasses extending into the sea. Back on the agenda: Mr Pratt said a number of factors were driving territorial claims back on to the political agenda. “Energy security is driving interest, as is the fact that Arctic ice is melting more and more during the summer,” he told BBC News. “This is allowing greater exploration of the Arctic seabed.” Data released by the US Geological Survey last month showed that the frozen region contained an estimated 90 billion barrels of untapped oil.
__________ Countries in the area are Russia, Norway, Denmark (Greenland), Iceland, Canada, the US (Alaska). We believe that 200 miles sovereignty (that is with exclusion of guaranteed maritime passage rights) from the shores of their land-mass is a foregone conclusion. Any claims to the extension of those sovereign waters should be rejected. Those further sea-bed rights belong to the We believe that this is China’s chance to declare its leading role for the 21st century.
Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 2nd, 2008 Obama Signals Support for Wider Offshore Drilling: ORLANDO, Aug. 1 — Sen. Barack Obama suggested on Friday that he could accept an expansion of offshore oil drilling as long as it was part of a broader package of measures that would free the logjam of energy bills in Congress. “My interest is in making sure we’ve got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices,” Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, said in an interview with the Palm Beach Post. “If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well-thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage — I don’t want to be so rigid that we can’t get something done.”
But with rising gasoline prices, polls indicate voters increasingly side with the Republicans, even here in Florida, where opposition to offshore drilling has always been strong. McCain switched his own position on the issue earlier this year, as did Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R), who had also been opposed. “It’s clear that members of both parties are following John McCain’s leadership toward an ‘all of the above’ approach on energy that includes nuclear, alternative energy, and off shore drilling,” McCain’s campaign said in a statement. “We hope Barack Obama will realize that his ongoing opposition to John McCain’s realistic energy solutions and additional off shore drilling is wrong.” Obama said in the Palm Beach Post interview that “the Republicans and the oil companies have been really beating the drums on drilling. And so we don’t want gridlock. We want to get something done.”
———- So, Obama goes with the wind - that is not the physical wind, but the wind created by the outgoing Republican Administration and spearheaded by Senator McCain. Drilling will be approved, beaches will be spoiled now for possible production in 10 year’s time. Money will be distributed now - to car manufacturers for doing what they knew to do already, universities for work on cellulose that has promise in 2050, the Al Gore push for an electric car will be ignored, people will think they are getting something out of this - but trust those that analyzed this boondoggle but you will find that you chose to go with the rest of Alaska’s Senator Ted Steven’s crowd. Al of the above simply because in Orlando, Florida, the Disney World took over the better of Senator Obama. The electorate tells him that they really - that is really - have no intent to allow change reaching their minds. We still believe that higher prices of fuel are the answer - but the gains from these higher prices should be rolled over for achieving immediate results in lowering the addiction to oil. Declare victory in Iraq and starch a surge in bringing troops home. Tell the Middle East and West Virginia that you have full intent to decrease the use of fossil fuels. But we also saw this earlier - no-one who says that has a chance at winning the US Presidency. We just posted today that India is a more promising place - there 9% was the figure that Nielsen found that people there said is how much their brain is occupied by the issue of Global Warming as compared to a global average of 4%. I do not have the figure for the US, but it is probably bellow the global average. And regarding cellulose industrialization - why not combust for heat the wood and other biomass? A Letter to the Wall Street Journal talks about fire-places in many homes, but even better - burn the material for heating boilers and have both - hot water/steam and electricity? This is the most efficient way to get the maximum out of the biomass. The technology was here yesterday. This brings us back to Al Gore’s latest campaign rather then the contraptions that the White House And Congress mention. Biomass recycles the CO2 - thus at least does not promote further fossil carbon coming into the atmosphere.
Permalink | |
