As if we needed any more evidence demonstrating that anthropogenic climate change is real, that it is occurring right now, and that it poses a major threat to the planet's environment, we now have it -- in spades. Let's begin with the assessment by a Penn State University investigation, which completely exonerated climate scientist Michael Mann from any wrongdoing in the ridiculous, trumped-up, never-any-truth-to-it, pseudo-"scandal" known as "climate-gate." In reaction to this report, former House Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) -- full disclosure, Boehlert's on the NRDC Action Fund board -- issued a statement which read:
This exoneration should close the book on the absurd episode in which climate scientists were unjustly attacked when in fact they have been providing a great public service. The attacks on scientists were a manufactured distraction, and today's report is a welcome return to common sense. While scientists can now focus on their work, policy makers need to address the very real problem of climate change.
Well said, Congressman, and keep up the great work, Professor Mann!
"no errors that would undermine the main conclusions in the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on possible future regional impacts of climate change"
"the summary conclusions are considered well founded, none have been found to contain any significant errors"
"ample observational evidence of regional climate change impacts, which have been projected to pose substantial risks to most parts of the world, under increasing temperatures"
In fairness, the Dutch report leveled several criticisms of the IPCC report: 1) even the few, minor errors shouldn't have been allowed to slip by; 2) the report's summary statement should have been written to provide a higher amount of transparency regarding its sources and methods; and 3) the report tended to focus solely on the adverse consequences of climate change, not on potentially positive impacts. These are non-trivial issues that need to be addressed. Having said that, as Joe Romm points out, "the overwhelming majority of research since the IPCC has found that the IPCC has consistently underestimated many key current and future impacts, particularly sea level rise (and carbon-cycle feedbacks)."
In the end, the bottom line from these reports is clear: the science behind human-induced climate change has emerged from this entire, ridiculous, episode overwhelmingly intact -- if not strengthened. The only real question now is, what are we going to do about it?
As if the oil companies from Texas – and their allies in the corridors of power - hadn’t done enough harm to our country already (for more, see the late, great Gulf of Mexico), now they are at it once again. This time, it’s Valero and Tesoro, pouring money into a campaign this election season to undo California’s landmark, clean energy and climate law, AB 32. On Tuesday, the oil companies’ proposition was certified for the November ballot. The fight, as they say, is on!
A quickie: right now (4pm) the new head of the Oregon League of Conservation Voters, Jon Isaacs--late of the victorious Merkley for Senate campaign--is conducting a live blog on Measures 66 and 67. Why would an environmental advocacy concern take the time to talk about tax fairness? Isaacs has already responded:
These measures will preserve our environment for future generations by preserving funding for vital environmental programs -
-clean air monitoring, clean water protection, investments in renewable energy, reducing pollution.
all of these things require revenue and if measures 66 & 67 fail, they will face devastating cuts.
Its really that simple.
They've got a fair number of questions apparently set up for Isaacs to go through, and you can email toby-at-olcv-dot-org to submit your own question. Head on over! And if you still need more convincing that the Leg did the right thing, OCPP's Chuck Sheketoff uses the state's December Revenue report to explain why.
Are you one to keep track of sustainability news in your local paper, maybe The O and perhaps online? Do you faithfully follow LUBA appeals and UGB hearings? Are you looking for the next green tax credit, or want to keep tabs on how your elected reps are working to protect the planet?
There are a bunch of you out there like that here in the great PNW, but as with any proactive search for news and information, it's a hell of a chore to keep up, even if you know just where to look. Wouldn't it be great if someone was doing the watching out FOR you, and simply dropped the best of what they've found to your email inbox every day? And threw in a little economic and cultural news for good measure?
Sightline Daily is a free news service and blog featuring sustainability, economic, and social news from around the Northwest. Sightline Daily emails give you a snapshot of the day's news. Our editors get up at 5AM every weekday, check more than 40 papers, and handpick the top 10 stories affecting life in our region.
Weekly Score emails give you the best of our blog every Friday. From walkability and transit to climate policy and human health, Sightline's researchers provide commentary and connect the dots across issues.
When you sign up, you’ll join a group of journalists, policy makers, and engaged citizens who use Sightline Daily to stay on top of their game. Readers call it “a great way to get the most important and interesting headlines of the day in one quick location."
Granola in vanilla Silk for breakfast, with a side of NW enviro news--how can you top that?
Ah, but you can: if you sign up for the Sightline Daily before October 29, you'll be entered to win more than just the sense of well being that comes with being properly informed. How's an all-expenses, two-night trip to the Emerald City sound?Two Amtrak tickets, two nights at the snazzy new Hyatt Olive 8 with breakfast included, vouchers for dinner at the equally hip Lark and Sutra, plus other goodies for activities during the day. Does. Not. Suck!
Even if you don't get the chance to sign up by the 28th, or don't win the trip, you'll still come out a winner if you sign up. A well-informed electorate is a powerful electorate!
In a letter to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, PG&E Chairman and CEO Peter Darbee cited "fundamental differences" over climate change to explain why the company is pulling out of the organization, despite the Chamber's "long history as a positive force for America's businesses and its economy."
The letter criticized the Chamber for taking an extreme position on climate change, which Darbee said does not represent the range of views among Chamber members. In particular, he took the Chamber to task for its recent demand that there be a "Scopes monkey trial of the 21st century" to challenge the science on climate change:
We find it dismaying that the Chamber neglects the indisputable fact that a decisive majority of experts have said the data on global warming are compelling and point to a threat that cannot be ignored. In our opinion, an intellectually honest argument over the best policy response to the challenges of climate change is one thing; disingenuous attempts to diminish or distort the reality of these challenges are quite another.
Darbee also drew a sharp contrast between the Chamber's approach and the constructive, consensus-driven positions forged by Edison Electric Institute and the U.S. Climate Action Partnership.
Instead, he said, "I fear it has forfeited an incredible chance to play a constructive leadership role on one of the most important issues our country may ever face."
Not every day, do you see a major US corporation vocally separating from the clubbiest of corporate advocacy arms. The Chamber doesn't hold much sway or give much love to the smaller business community, but PG&E are one of the big boys, the kind that the Chamber is primed to enrich as a part of their mission. And as the letter indicates, they are willing to go to great lengths to influence policy for their benefit.
This isn't something you do to greenwash the public, I don't think. There are lots of other, less bridge-burning ways to do that. So I'm not sure whether this says more (that's bad) about the Chamber, or more (that's good) about PG&E. This is the kind of move you make out of real concern, as an attempt to publicly disassociate yourself ethically from bad actors, and in so doing establish your own ethical bonafides. I'd say it was an ample attempt.
What does it mean on a practical basis? Little that's tangible, surely. Things will be uncomfortable at the next EnergyCon or wherever major utility execs and their Chamber flacks gather, I suppose, but on the surface this doesn't save an ounce of carbon or slow the Chamber down one bit. What it MAY do, however, is draw a line in the sand and encourage other fossil fuel companies to drop their reflexive opposition to new climate policies, or at least give them cover to soften that opposition.
And purely on a moral aesthetic level, this is good business, good policy, and good corporate behavior. PG&E are not necessarily saints of the utility industry, but it's really encouraging to see the development of pushback to the building insanity against sane policy in this country since Obama's election. This is one, small but meaningful step in the right direction.
Oregonians are rightfully celebrating the legislature’s recent decision to protect one of our natural treasures – the unspoiled lands along the Metolius River. Meanwhile, just 100 miles to the south, on the doorstep of the crown jewel of Oregon, a Bush-era logging plan is threatening to destroy thousands of acres of pristine forests and recreation areas. Despite President Obama’s much more environmentally-friendly attitude, and what ought to be the greenest Congress in decades, a logging project targeting roadless wildlands on the doorsteps of Crater Lake National Park continues to roll forward. Oregon’s leaders need to start paying attention, step up, and do what they can to stop it. A few have, but others are notable by their silence.
The D-Bug Timber Sale is about as ugly as its name. The project area extends north from the border of Crater Lake National Park, extending 10 miles beyond Diamond Lake. East to west, it stretches from the edges of the Mt. Thielsen Wilderness to the backcountry around Mount Bailey. This one timber sale includes more logging in roadless areas than occurred across the entire country during the entire Bush administration. Adding insult to injury, it proposes to turn miles of hiking trails in the Cascade Recreation Area into logging roads, and the Umpqua National Forest is diverting federal stimulus dollars to help pay for it.
Oregon Wild strongly supports common-sense projects that appropriately address legitimate threats to health and human property, and a tiny portion of DBug does that. Thinning around Diamond Lake to protect cabins and structures makes sense. However, large-scale commercial logging in some of Oregon’s most pristine backcountry recreation areas does not.
Got a nail? I’ve got a hammer. Trying to find the right tool to stop reckless developments near the Metolius was tricky. This shouldn’t be a problem with DBug. In 2001, then-President Bill Clinton enacted the 2001 Roadless Area Conservation rule, instructing the Forest Service that America’s remaining roadless wildlands should stay that way. Under the roadless rule, hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, rafting etc… are encouraged in our remaining roadless areas, as are projects to improve wildlife habitat and address legitimate fire risks. However, these areas were put off-limits to commercial logging, mining, and other destructive development.
Unfortunately, the Bush administration spent 8 years trying to repeal the 2001 Roadless Rule, despite the enormous support it enjoys from businesses in the outdoor recreation industry, scientists, conservationists, sportsmen, economists, religious leaders, and elected leaders across the country. Here in Oregon this year, the Rule has received support from Governor Kulongoski, former (and perhaps future) Governor Kitzhaber, Bill Bradbury, Les AuCoin, John Kroger, and many, many more.
Forest Follies As with so many other issues, when it came to roadless policy, the administration inherited a mess. During the campaign, President Obama said he would “be proud to support and defend [the Rule]”. On May 28th, he took a major step by issuing an interim directive providing the Secretary of Agriculture final decision-making authority over all roadless projects. The goal of the directive was to “provide consistency and clarity that will help our National Forests until a long-term roadless policy reflecting President Obama’s commitment is developed”. Many cheered the news and dubbed it a “roadless timeout”.
This was wishful thinking. Just last week, the Secretary approved a 381-acre roadless clearcut in America’s largest rainforest. Unfortunately, perhaps emboldened by mixed signals from the administration, Umpqua National Forest Manager Clifford Dils isn’t taking the hint, and continues to spend scarce federal tax dollars to advance his DBug sale by pointing to “uncertainty” over whether or not roadless areas will be protected in the future.
This isn’t a jobs vs. the environment debate. Roadless area protection has long enjoyed enormous support from the outdoor recreation industry. In January, a coalition of over 90 outdoor recreation businesses, including well-known brands like JanSport, Kelty, Filson, Sierra Designs, Montrail, Scott Fly Rods, and Cascade Designs, sent a letter to Obama urging him to support the 2001 Roadless Rule. They’ve since been joined by dozens more. Few Americans enjoy hiking through clear cuts or fishing in a river buried by a mudslide. Protecting our remaining pristine roadless areas is one way to preserve both Oregon’s tourism and recreation economy and our quality of life.
Where does Oregon fit in? Oregon’s outdoor businesses, elected officials, and citizens have long led the charge in trying to protect roadless wild areas. Clinton’s 2001 Roadless Rule came out of the most extensive public involvement process in federal rule-making history. On a per-capita basis, Oregonians submitted more public comment than any other state (over 90% were in favor). In 2006, Governor Kulongoski joined with state leaders in Washington, California, and New Mexico to sue the Bush administration to stop its repeal of the Rule. Also in 2006, Representatives Blumenauer, DeFazio, Hooley, and Wu cosponsored legislation to make the Roadless Rule permanent. Oregon businesses, from Keen Footwear to Clackacraft drift boats, also support protection for roadless areas.
The plan to log on the doorstep of Crater Lake has made it frighteningly clear how important it is that protection for our remaining pristine roadless wildlands not be subject to the whim of changing administrations. As we speak, Representatives and Senators are signing on to co-sponsor the Roadless Area Conservation Act of 2009. So far, Senator Merkley and Congressmen Blumenauer, DeFazio, and Wu have stepped up and joined nearly 100 other conservation champions in doing so.
When the Metolius was threatened by shortsighted development interests, pressure was brought to bear on our leaders in Salem, and ultimately they did the right thing. Now that wildlands around Crater Lake are being threatened, Oregon’s Congressional leaders must do the same.
As chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests, Ron Wyden is in the perfect position to help protect the wildlands around Crater Lake, and roadless areas across the country. Put simply, his opinion matters when it comes to forest issues. A good first step would be taking a public position against logging pristine roadless areas around Crater Lake. By doing so he can help put the brakes on the project.
Senator Wyden should join with Senator Cantwell, Senator Merkley, and over a dozen other Senators and support legislation to permanently protect America’s remaining unspoiled roadless areas. Click below to find out how you can join with hundreds of other Oregonians urging Senator Wyden to support roadless area protection.
One of the primary assumptions of the so-called "Smart Growth" movement has long been that smart growth, combined with expenditures on mass transit (especially transit such as light rail or streetcar that encourage "choice" riders who might otherwise drive) save everyone time and money and protect the environment. The latest statistics from the Texas Transportation Institute show this to be the case. This diary will briefly describe Oregon's land use system as it applies to Smart Growth and our investments in public transportation, along with their impacts.
Tre Arrow says on his Web site that he is due to be released Monday from a federal prison in California to serve the remaining six months of his term at a halfway house in Portland.
The 35-year-old environmental activist was sentenced last year to 78 months in prison after pleading guilty to setting fire to cement and logging trucks in the Portland area in 2001.
But Arrow was given credit for about four years of time served in jails awaiting extradition from Canada to Oregon after his arrest in British Columbia in 2004.
The Federal Bureau of Prisons lists his release date as Dec. 4 from the Herlong medium security prison near Susanville, Calif.
An agency spokeswoman says the bureau does not confirm whether an inmate was sent to a halfway house until after the inmate arrives.
It will be interesting to see whether and when Mr. Arrow (nee Michael Scarpitti) will hew to the straight and narrow, whether he will eventually resume his environmental advocacy--and whether anyone beyond his shrunken core of followers will listen. Until the arsons, he was a creative and effective spokesperson for aggressive action. The energy is still needed, at least.
Earlier this week there was a report from TA Barnhart, writing in Blue Oregon, about a meeting of Multnomah Democrats where Attorney General John Kroger bluntly asserted his desires from the state Legislature:
Kroger and his Special Assistant, Ben Unger (who, like Kroger, is a Mult Dems precinct committee person) had come to the meeting to gather support for getting the Ways and Means Committee, and, in particular, Sen Margaret Carter to approve the assignment of DoJ lawyers to civil rights works. As if incredulous that it was the case, Kroger asked how Oregon could have a real Justice Dept if it did not prosecute civil rights cases. And then, to answer his own question, he stated that while the need for both civil rights and environmental crimes attorneys in his office seemed a "no-brainer," the "forces of inertia are immense." Switching to law professor mode, he stated if there was one lesson to be learned from the Civil Rights Movement, it's that "you don't get progress unless you sue people".
Clearly Kroger is a little frustrated at not getting what he sees as important pieces of his strategy for the AG's office. But as you can read from the comments, in the areas involving both civil rights and environmental enforcement there are already agencies handling some sort of monitoring against unlawful practices, and Kroger is being perceived in some circles as a typically aggressive Easterner who is overstepping traditional lines and protocol, with strong backfiring potential.
For my part, I think both BOLI and DEQ are inadequate to fully enforce the laws they're monitoring, otherwise the arguments Kroger made on the campaign trail about lack of functional enforcement outcomes would have rung hollow. And it's a logical argument: you can't civilly pressure wrongdoing; there has to be a hammer. Kroger wants to be the hammer, the Big Toe if you're a Stripes fan.
And speaking of the campaign, I thought it would be most helpful to remind readers (especially those in the Leg or clucking their tongues in the media) that these points and pleas being made by Kroger shouldn't be surprising at all, since they mirror exactly what he was arguing for on the campaign trail for last year's elections--elections in which he won nominations of BOTH parties. Maybe the Leg should think about that a little? They can read what Kroger said about his aims, in an excerpt from our extended interview with Kroger in February 2008. Hop below the fold for his near-verbatim commentary...
Think North America, whose parent company makes emission-free vehicles, confirmed today that it's considering Oregon and seven other states for a factory that would ultimately make 60,000 compact cars a year.
Think managers want to convert an existing building into a car plant and to launch an engineering center, perhaps alongside. As Oregon, Michigan, California and other states scramble to offer incentives, Think plans to decide on a location within a couple of months, investing an as-yet-undisclosed amount.
"There's a number of things that appeal to Think about Oregon," said Brendan Prebo, a Think North America spokesman, who added that state officials are pursuing both the factory project and the engineering center. "They've also shown their interest in terms of supporting electric vehicle sales."
Gov. Ted Kulongoski, a proponent of all-electric vehicles, has said such cars could be made in Oregon, in addition to being test-marketed here as the state installs charging stations. But Think's interest in the state is the first specific indication that Oregon could become a mini Detroit for green vehicles.
There's all kinds of synergy possible here--PGE has been a leader in creating electrical plug-ins for electric vehicles; the city already has at least one zero-emission vehicle dealership, and of course we've got our share of enviro-engineers and technicians who understand the technology.
The appeal of the state for this kind of thing is echoed by the news that Goobernor Ted will be test driving an EV prototype developed by Nissan, which they are planning for national launch in Portland next year. Both Ted and Senator Wyden are also slated to test drive the Think car tomorrow. Additionally, the Leg is working on two bills--one which will give tax breaks to manufacturers that move operations here to build green cars, and one that will phase out a hybrid vehicle credit in favor of an all-electric credit. Finally, the article notes that there's already an existing and empty plant suitable for building vehicles...the old Freightliner complex.
It almost seems too perfect, doesn't it? A manufacturer of green cars, looking for a city that incentivizes green industry, is a hot market for it and is already building infrastructure to accomodate it? Plus it's those socialist Norwegians, who like Euro things like soccer (check!), skiing (check!) and, well, socialism (hello, Little Beruit!) If we can quickly build a lutefisk industry, I think we're a shoo-in. Just don't mention....shhhh...Ikea.
Tuesday’s signing of the historic American Recovery and Reinvestment Act marked a substantial victory for environmentalists nationwide. Salon offers an excellent accounting of the environmentally friendly components of the package, as well as a round-up of glowing statements from prominent national environmental organizations. At the outset of his remarks, President Obama made it perfectly clear that the stimulus package is just "the beginning" of the hard work that must be done. David Sirota agrees, noting that "the fights from here get tougher."
To that end, 25 of the largest environmental and conservation organizations in the country have just released the Green Budget for fiscal year 2010. The report outlines priorities for federal spending on lands and wildlife, energy, environment and public health, oceans, transportation and other programs.
If you read the Oregonian or listened to OPB yesterday you saw that some people spent their summer hard at work poring over maps, analyzing what's worth protectin' in our great blue ocean. This week was the closing deadline for Oregonians to submit to the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife their nominations for marine reserves and protected areas in our coastal waters. I'm happy about that.
Let's hope Oregon's political leadership looks to future generations of Oregonians, be they fishermen or just plain old citizens who love our coast: setting aside areas of Oregon's Territorial Sea as marine reserves and protected areas will be a tremendous legacy, the best, in fact, since, oh, the Bottle Bill. Hey folks, be proud, we have a world-class ocean, but it's getting hammered - we've all heard the news about climate change, depleted fish stocks, and all the rest of the doom and gloom.
Well, it looks like some folks have been hard at work thinking about some vital marine habitat to protect as underwater parks, kind of like the National Park concept. Here's a link to the press release the Our Ocean coalition sent out this morning detailing eight household name sites along the coast that we are proposing be permanently protected. Recognize some of them? I'm going to write the Governor to tell him that I think it's high time that we joined Washington and California and protect our precious marine habitat, and I hope you do, too.
I became an environmental activist in the early 1970s just as I was completing my doctorate in ecology at the University of British Columbia. It was the height of the Cold War and the height of the Viet Nam War and we were compelled to take a very public stand against activities we thought to be catastrophic both for people and for the planet.
I joined a small committee that was meeting in the basement of the Unitarian Church. We organized a protest voyage against U.S. hydrogen bomb testing in Alaska and had tens of thousands marching in the streets. When that H-bomb was set off at Amchitka Island in November 1971, it was the last hydrogen bomb the U.S. ever detonated.
It was the birth of Greenpeace, the organization I co-founded, spending 15 years in its top committee, helping to lead environmental campaigns around the world.
But it's ironic in the extreme that, as we mark the 100th anniversary of drinking water chlorination, my old organization and other activist groups aligned with it continue to oppose this most important public health achievement.
A quick take on one of the non-delegate, non-politician, non-media Oregonians hanging out in Denver. She's a vendor with a company in Portland, and she surrounds herself with the products of death. Ewwwww!
If the biodegradable coffin business ever takes off, its executives can point to this year’s Democratic convention as the breakout moment.
The convention organizers’ goal of making the gathering the greenest political hobnob in history has unleashed a wave of pitches and promotions surrounding organic foods, renewable fuels, carbon offsets and consumer goods made from recyclable materials. Among those fighting for attention is Cynthia Beal, founder of the Portland, Ore.-based Natural Burial Co., who is trying to convince Americans that they need not pass into the great beyond in the confines of conventional wood or steel caskets — which can take up to 25 years to decompose.
As delegates arrived in Denver over the weekend, Beal used a green-business festival outside the city’s performing arts complex to hawk two of her best-sellers: a sarcophagus made of recycled newsprint that looked a little like an oversized violin case, and a woven willow coffin that resembled a picnic basket on steroids. Both are designed to turn to dust about six months after burial.
“Every industry has to find a way to change and provide natural options, and the funeral business is the next low-hanging fruit,” Beal said. Her biggest obstacle? People who think it’s against the law to be buried in receptacles that at first glance, look better suited for takeout food.
“Cemeteries aren’t forever,” she said, as conventioneers and passersby perused her wares. “The private cemetery regulations that require things like vaults and grave-liners serve no purpose for public health and safety; they’re for landscaping management. Maybe we need to start a lobbying effort.”
Both the Mrs. and I are well down with green burials; at present we're planning on being incinerated. But a nice wicker basket would be nice too!
Now that the Shiite is really starting to hit the fan in a big way on fuel prices, with light sweet crude threatening $150 a barrel this week and $4-plus gas prices look like the new norm, you can bet that the fossil fuel industry and its backers will do their level best to try to convince everyone that trying to acquire MORE fossil fuels is the way to a) reduce prices and b) regain market stability. We've already seen the first rumblings of such tactics, borne out in the suggestion that we abandon restrictions on offshore drilling. Would it surprise you that John McCain is one of the suggesters? Of course not. Drilling in ANWR is also getting another boost for the same reason, and pressure on OPEC nations continue in order to increase supply.
What folks like McCain don't want you to think about is that anything we do to increase supply (as opposed to increasing production in extracting and refining that supply) would likely take a decade or more to find any practicable results. Not exactly a quick fix.
Well, the short answer is of course that there ARE no quick fixes at this late stage of the game. But while he's home for the July 4th recess, Rep. Earl Blumenauer is taking the initiative and today rolled out a proposal of focused, low-cost actions the government can take to both ease the pain of high prices and reduce immediate consumption. Earl?
Gas prices have shot up by more than a dollar a gallon in the last few months. As much as we all want a simple solution to the complex energy puzzle, there is no silver bullet.
One thing we can do now is give people more choices. Portland is recognized internationally because of the transportation choices we offer our citizens. This has led to huge savings for families, and I want to improve on this model and extend it to other areas of the country.
My proposal includes everything from offering a tax credit for carpooling to helping transit agencies cope with rising fuel prices and demand by funding fare subsidies, service improvements, fuel purchases, and technology assistance. These are short term actions that will immediately provide relief from rising energy costs.
If you live in the Portland area, no doubt you've heard of Trimet's plans to raise their fares by 25 cents in September, oxymoronically just at a time when the agency continues to see record and increasing ridership. There are actually good reasons for that, but it doesn't help encourage anyone to continue opting for public trans, when their costs are going up another $10 a month for commuters. And it doesn't solve the gaps in service that prevent even greater utilization. So picking up the slack in both areas can earn benefit for "the government" by encouraging ridership at lower fares on more transit vehicles, reducing vehicle miles and slowing demand.
Below, a more complete list of individual proposals from the not-yet-submitted legislation...many of which are stunningly simple, like tax credits for running a van pool, or allowing employees to use parking benefits for transit fares instead. Others are somewhat more complex and strategic rather than tactical, like a restructuring of transit project evaluation scorecards, to reward modes like streetcars for their impact on a city's carbon footprint. I tend to be skeptical about legislative fixes for broad economic problems, but Earl doesn't bite off more than we can chew, and I'm actually excited to see what kind of reception it gets from leadership when they return to session after the break. Kudos Earl!
From Sunday's Bend Bulletin (sub only) during a discussion of energy policy being debated in Congress, a little insight into whether Oregon's federal delegation has grasped at least the optics of responsible transportation, if not a heartfelt conversion:
Oregon’s lawmakers have also taken different approaches to their personal energy consumption. Wyden owns a 1993 Ford Explorer but said he rarely drives it because he lives just a few blocks from his Washington, D.C., office. Blumenauer bikes to work on an orange Trek. Walden drives a hybrid Toyota Prius, both in Washington and Oregon. Smith drives a Mercedes in Washington, D.C., and a Jeep in Oregon, he said.[emph mine]
Walden could probably get away with quietly driving a gas guzzler in Washington while putting on a good show at home, so credit for taking the Prius to DC with him. I'm not sure I buy that Wyden doesn't drive enough in his life to make the purchase of a newer, cleaner car a good option for the Senator, but if he's walking to work he gets a pass. Earl of course is the gold standard of practicing what you preach.
And then there's Gordon. Oh, Gordon. It's unclear what models he's driving, but a quick check of the 2008 fuel ratings from EPA suggests that neither the Benz nor the Jeep he owns are drawing more than about 20mpg on the highway. I guess leading by example just isn't on his agenda. Buying a smarter car (or even a SmartCar) won't convince anybody that Smith is ready to join Greenpeace, but it might help people stop doubting his sincerity when he votes for energy policy bills he knows will safely fail.
The Reg-Guard has a smart and pointed op-ed today, taking Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn to task for his continued and repeated efforts to block our legislators from protecting the best of Oregon's wilderness. It's enough to toss out a few WTF?s:
If any federal lawmaker ever deserved the collective stink eye from Oregonians, it’s U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn, the Oklahoma Republican who is blocking two Oregon wilderness bills.
Last winter, Oregon Sens. Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith introduced a bill that would increase wilderness protections in the Mount Hood area by 125,000 acres and grant wild and scenic river protections to an additional 80 miles of Oregon rivers.
The Lewis and Clark Mount Hood Wilderness Act of 2007 passed in committee with bipartisan support. With backing from the Bush administration, it was on a fast track for passage. Then, at the last moment, Coburn put a hold on it, adding it to the long list of bills he is blocking because they call for new spending without offsetting cuts.
Now, the Copper Salmon Wilderness Act, which would set aside 13,700 acres of old growth at the headwaters of the Elk River in Southwestern Oregon, has met the same fate. The bill was headed for passage in the full Senate before it became the latest victim of a Coburn hold.
Coburn claims to act on principle, but it’s selectively applied. The Mount Hood bill would cost taxpayers $11 million over five years, and the Copper Salmon bill costs so little that the Congressional Budget Office says it’s revenue neutral. Yet Coburn is an unquestioning supporter of the war in Iraq, which is paid for by hundreds of billions of borrowed dollars without offsetting cuts.
Wyden and Smith must find a way to break Coburn’s holds and clear the way for Senate passage of the “Oregon Treasures” bill pending in the House.
This is such a dick move by Coburn, I'm not even going to spend time getting pissed off at the lumping of Gordo in there with Wyden, as some champion for the environment. (Why don't I let sarahlane do it instead, from over at OpenLeft?)
The key shot in that editorial is Coburn's utter hypocrisy about spending money on things without a way to pay for it--like President Bush and the rest of the Republican Party, it's Coburn's signature on the IOUs the Chinese hold for to pay for our recent war efforts. To say that an unfunded expenditure of a trillion dollars is just the way the cookie crumbles, but that the relatively infinitesimal $11 million in permanent wilderness preservation costs represents unacceptable spendthriftiness...well, allow me to sputter and vent my disagreement.
Oh, I guess I just did. Would you like to add your voice?
Senator Tom Coburn, Oklahoma
172 Russell Senate Office Bldg. Washington, DC 20510 Main: 202-224-5754 Fax: 202-224-6008
Is it enough for Oregon to focus only on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from Oregon sources? And is it fair to ask Oregonians to bear the inconveniences and costs of reducing our greenhouse gases while others, notably China and India, continue their rapid increases in emissions, making our reductions insignificant to the larger trends of global warming and climate change? Perhaps we should talk about strategies for influencing China and India as we talk about meeting our own goals for emission reductions.
First, consider the importance of China’s use of coal to generate electricity:
Governor Ted Kulongoski and NY Times columnist Tom Friedman share an interest in an “electric car” future.
Writing about the best energy policy for the US in the NY Times on 5/28/08, Friedman says here:
We need to make a structural shift in our energy economy. Ultimately, we need to move our entire fleet to plug-in electric cars. The only way to get from here to there is to start now with a price signal that will force the change.
Governor Kulongoski recently visited Israel and learned of Israel’s effort tomove to an electric car future as described in the following video:
Even when you accept the premise that no news story can be completely free of editorial bias, it's easy to fall into the common pattern of accepting the essential truth of the media source you're reading, as you read it. The assumptions, the use of different words to describe the same thing, the completeness of the report as if some writers were there and some asked one who was, etc.--they all subtly influence a story. Perhaps the least acknowledged influence is what's NOT written, what they chose to leave unsaid through ignorance or carelessness, space or a combination.
But it all plays a role. Sometimes it's a good reminder to be skeptical of all premises and undocumented concepts. Today's arraignment of Tre Arrow, nee Michael Scarpitti, offers several different takes on the same 20-minute hearing. We'll take a look at them, below, but the short story is that Tre Arrow, recently surrendered from Canada on charges subject to new Bush-era anti-terror rules that threaten to imprison him for life, and had his arraignment hearing Monday. He was held without bond as a flight risk, pending triel.
RSS Feed: http://www.loadedorygun.net/rss/rss2.xml
As if we needed any more evidence demonstrating that anthropogenic climate change is real, that it is occurring right now, and that it poses a major threat to the planet's environment, we now have it -- in spades. Let's begin with the 
As if the oil companies from Texas – and their allies in the corridors of power - hadn’t done enough harm to our country already (for more, see the late, great Gulf of Mexico), now they are at it once again. This time, it’s Valero and Tesoro, pouring money into a campaign this election season to undo California’s landmark, clean energy and climate law, AB 32. On Tuesday, the oil companies’ proposition 
Tre Arrow says on his Web site that he is due to be released Monday from a federal prison in California to serve the remaining six months of his term at a halfway house in Portland. 