Red, Green, and Blue

Like this post? Subscribe to our RSS feed and stay up to date.

Big oil has been spending big money in Washington, but it may surprise you that gas and oil companies spend more money on corporate lobbying than individual campaign contributions.  Why chose lobbying over campaign contributions?  Lobbying is more effective at crushing energy bills, as we have seen this year.  As Ralph Nader explains, “The corporate lobby in Washington is basically designed to stifle all legislative activity on behalf of consumers.”  It’s no coincidence that recently the Senate blocked the extension renewable energy tax credits.

Thus far in 2008, oil and gas companies have spent $55,339,015 million on lobbying in an effort to convince lawmakers to vote in the industry’s favor and against renewables.  Not surprisingly, the top spender is Exxon-Mobil.  At the current rate of spending, the industry is set to break last year’s record of $83 million. Big Oil defends this increased spending in response to more energy bills being on the “menu” and denies it is responsible for the failure of these bills; however, lobbying dollars speak for themselves. According to CNN:

The oil industry may have not gotten its drilling wish list just yet, but so far they have been able to avoid higher taxes.

Meanwhile, the renewable energy folks haven’t seen a big increase in funding.

Looking at the dollars spent lobbying Congress, that may not be surprising. The renewable industry and their allies in the environmental movement have spent a combined $19 million lobbying Congress this year - half what the oil industry has spent. Read the rest of this entry »

While in Aspen last week for a fundraiser at the Aspen Institute, Republican Presidential hopeful John McCain met for breakfast with Texas billionaire oil man turned wind energy advocate T. Boone Pickens. The pair chatted for a few minutes in front of cameras, and then they met privately for more than an hour.

The issue of alternative fuels came up for McCain Thursday as well, during a forum at the Aspen Institute. In the past, McCain has said that he opposes tax breaks for wind and solar development because they interfere with the market. Asked about that Thursday, McCain said he has a long record of support for alternative fuels. Asked specifically if he was for renewing tax breaks for wind and solar that expire this year, he surprisingly said, “of course.” Read the rest of this entry »

The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today added Congressman Sam Graves (MO-6) and California developer Dean Andal to its 2008 “Dirty Dozen” list. Compiled annually, the Dirty Dozen targets current and former members of Congress - regardless of party affiliation - who consistently vote against the environment and are running in races where LCV has a serious chance of affecting the outcome.

Andal has an abysmal record on energy and environmental issues make him one of the worst candidates for federal office in the nation, according to the LCV. The LCV refers to Andal as “the new Pombo,” in reference to former Chair of the House Natural Resources Committee and foe of the environmental movement, Richard Pombo. Read the rest of this entry »

Since 1910, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has calculated the nation’s seafood consumption rates to keep consumers and the industry informed about trends in seafood consumption and trade.

According to this year’s report, Americans consumed a total of 4.908 billion pounds of seafood in 2007, slightly less than the 4.944 billion pounds in 2006. The average American ate 16.3 pounds of fish and shellfish in 2007, a one percent decline from the 2006 consumption figures of 16.5 pounds. But what most concerns NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service, a division of the Department of Commerce, is the growth in imported farm-raised seafood coupled with declines global fishstocks. Read the rest of this entry »

Why would some of the nation’s top environmental leaders, activists, and academics be sharing the same stage with some of the most influential and well-known people in music? And why did a sizable portion of the audience consist of unshowered, sleep-deprived, politically active 20 and 30-somethings? In a word, ROTHBURY.

The ROTHBURY Music Festival held at the idyllic Double JJ Ranch near the eastern shore of Lake Michigan attracted about 40,000 music lovers from all 50 U.S. states and 15 countries. And while the four-day festival attracted musical acts as diverse as Widespread Panic, Trey Anastasio, Snoop Dogg, Modest Mouse, and Primus, politically-engaged attendees were also invited to participate in a dozen “think tank” events with the theme: “Finding Energy Independence.”

To curate ROTHBURY’S series of think tank events, Festival organizers brought in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate scientist and Stanford University professor, Dr. Stephen Schneider. Schneider helped kick-off the Think Tank series of events with a live taping of the national radio show E-Town. Joining Schneider was former Green Party Vice-Presidential candidate Winona LaDuke. The pair discussed how we might move forward with political solutions to climate change and they both put particular emphasis on the tremendous importance of the upcoming 2008 election.

“This is the fusion of information and emotion,” Schneider said of the dual roles of speakers and musicians. “The message will spread way beyond ROTHBURY.”

Think Tank events were scattered throughout the four-day festival and to keep things fresh, they were also scattered throughout the Double JJ Ranch, to give the events as broad exposure as possible.

With panel discussion names like: “The Path to Energy Independence and a New American Revolution;” “How America’s Youth are Driving the Energy Revolution;” How Do We Motivate the Masses to be Part of the Energy Revolution?” And “The Energy Revolution will not be Televised - Demanding Change from our Political Leaders and the Media,” this ecopolitical geek was in heaven. But catching all of the great panel discussions would have been a Herculean task for anyone, let alone a devoted music junkie like myself.

The ones that I did catch (besides the ones at the larger stages), were attended by a very thoughtful and interested cadre of folks, spanning the spectrum of environmentalism from committed enviros to the “green curious.” But what may have been the most special aspect of the Think Tanks themselves was seeing and hearing some real big names in music talk about what they do as individuals or as a band to lessen the environmental impact of their touring.

Speaking with particular candor about this very matter was one member of the band Sound Tribe Sector Nine who noted that they were more than a little aware of the ecological footprint of their touring the country with large coaches, tractor-trailers to haul the gear, and electricity-sucking light shows and sound systems. And even though they took steps to mitigate that impact (at one point the band used to claim carbon-neutral tours) the large footprint still tugged at him a little bit.

Festival organizers Madison House and AEG Live spoke openly about raising the bar for music other music festivals, both in terms of the actual sustainability of such a large undertaking, but also in terms of harnessing the energy from that large undertaking and focusing it on a larger social cause.  And while they succeeded at raising that bar, I’m guessing they see room for improvement and will come back with an even more impressive festival experience next year and for years to come.

Other Posts About ROTHBURY:

• “ROTHBURY: Festival Also Sets Sights on Food and Waste”
• “Win ROTHBURY Tickets”
• “Winner Announced: What is Right/What is Wrong with the Environmental Movement Today?”

Photos: 1. Mike Gordon and Trey Anastasio of Phish - Michael Weintraub; 2. John Bell of Widespread Panic - Tim Hurst; 3. Sherwood Forest by Day - C. Taylor Crothers; 4. Sherwood Forest by Night - C. Taylor Crothers.

The EPA dealt Texas a hard blow on Thursday. It turned down the state’s request for a reduction to our Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS). A decision that some environmentalists are sticking in the plus column for biofuels. I can’t say I agree.

It’s not that I’m not on the biofuel bandwagon. I am. Just don’t run the bandwagon on ethanol. Or any other bio solution currently available. Yes they all sound very promising. But we need a strong smart solution, not a promise.

I do think it’s great that biofuels are finally getting real public attention. Especially from the EPA. The agency has so many blemishes on it’s policy record it warrants the Proactive Solution. But a hasty push towards a biofuel solution is as bad as doing nothing at all. And that’s what the RFS is, hasty.

Yes, much has been said about the sustainability of a corn-based solution. And there is that whole food for fuel argument, and the questionable sustainability of the ubiquitous crop. All of which are good arguments. But for me, it’s a matter of how were just shifting the burden from petroleum to corn: that’s not a solution in my book.

And it’s precisely that burden which is being felt in the Lone Star state: their livestock industry is taking a major hit. Why? Because our Renewable Fuel Standard is about quantity, not quality. The current 2008 standard demands 7.76 percent, which is about 9 billion gallons, of renewable fuel. With a definition of a renewable fuel only being “the opposite of fossil fuel,” moving forward to the 2022 standard of 36 billion gallons could be catastrophic.

This is why we cannot afford an EPA Chief who is so myopic. Under Stephen Johnson’s leadership the agency denied California the power necessary to meet these somewhat ambigous goals. A decision that has the EPA scrambling to try to save face while the Democrats are standing at the castle doors with their pitchforks and torches in tow. It’s like a scene out of Frankenstein. But unlike Frankenstien, the EPA is far from green.

Related Posts:

Group Sues EPA for Inaction on Coal Permit
EPA Chief on Hot Seat Over California Emissions Denial
Biofuels Will Not Solve Global Warming: IPCC’s Report Sparks Protest

Image source: Nik Agarwal at The Air

With the recent dropping of crude oil prices to below $120 a barrel, there are sighs of relief on both sides of the aisle. But is that a good thing if you’re perhaps a bit more environmental-leaning?

Recently, Canadian investment bank BMO Nesbitt Burns’ deputy chief economist has suggested that high gas prices are making a difference in commuting behaviour. According to a note from Statistics Canada, service station receipts went up by 2.4% in May, while gasoline prices grew more than 3 times that: 8.8%. This suggests pretty strongly that high gas prices have induced commuters to change their driving behaviours. People are starting to leave their cars at home and taking public transit, working compressed workweeks or just carpooling. Anything that might allow them to save on fuel costs.

Read the rest of this entry »

In July, when President Bush made his “historic” visit to Northern California to view wildfires, Representative Wally Herger was on board the helicopter.  Other than putting on some Nomex and shaking smoke jumpers’ hands, what has Wally Herger done for Californians during the 2008 Firestorm?  Now that the fires are mostly contained, Herger has a plan to utilize emergency provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to salvage log the burned areas, much of which contain live old growth trees.

Herger’s Voting Record

Wally Herger is one of the worst representatives in Congress evident by his voting record.  He is against women’s right to choose, the Endangered Species Amendment Act, alternative fuels and public transportation, alternative energy tax incentives, etc.  Herger is for the war, FISA, drug war funding in Mexico and Central America, etc. Now he wants to open up the forests to logging without following the full guidelines of NEPA, which requires “federal agencies to integrate environmental values into their decision making processes by considering the environmental impacts of their proposed actions and reasonable alternatives to those actions,” including an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Read the rest of this entry »

In what comes as a surprising move, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Andy Karsner announced his resignation from the Department of Energy on Wednesday. Karsner’s resignation came on the same day as news that Senate Republicans blocked an attempt to extend funding for renewable energy tax credits for the fourth time this summer. It is still unclear if there is any relationship between the two events.

While Karsner has not given any reason for the resignation, the underlying point is that he resigned from a one-of -a-kind job at a time when there is major political discord about how the U.S. should be moving forward with its energy policy. Perhaps Mr. Karsner wanted to get off the U.S.S. Bush before it took him down with it?

Read the rest of this entry »

In 2007, the United States Forest Service (USFS) spent $1.37 billion fighting wildfires, up from $307 million ten years ago. This year, that number will be much greater due to the 2008 California Firestorm.  For example, the Lime Complex in the Shasta-Trinity National Forest, which is not contained, has a current cost (7/28/08) of $38,627,355!  How will financially strapped California and the USFS pay for these fires and did these fires grow larger because of Bush administration budget cuts?

Year after year, Bush has cut funding from the USFS, yet within this budget, more money is allocated for fire management and less for fire prevention.  In February, 2008, Bush proposed decreasing fire preparedness monies by 11 percent. Although the budget calls for a $150 million increase for extinguishing blazes, prevention funding is slashed by $77 million, including a $13 million reduction in small fuels removal. Similar cuts were proposed in 2007.  Casey Judd, business manager for the Federal Wildland Fire Service Association, a firefighter employee group explains, “The administration still has it backward. Preparedness should be the focus, not suppression.”   Norm Dicks, D-Wash., adds, “Common sense would be that if you put more money into fuel reduction, it’s going to have an effect on having less severe fires.”  The White House response was that money could be shifted between the agency’s firefighting and fire suppression accounts, as needed.  This is exactly what concerns USFS employees with the current California wildfires. Read the rest of this entry »