If you’re like me, you’re genuinely afraid of the global-warming future we’re facing if humankind doesn’t get serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions A WHOLE LOT AND REAL FAST.

Like Al Gore and spiritual leaders from many faiths, you and me understand that global warming is a moral issue.  We also understand that unchecked global warming will wreak (and is wreaking) havoc with almost all facets of our economy ranging from food supply to the insurance industry (and we’ve already seen with AIG how human decisions affecting the insurance industry ripple throughout the entire economy).  If all that wasn’t bad enough, scientists have also predicted that continued rises in greenhouse gas emissions will deepen (and in some cases already is deepening) other existing ecological crises like water pollution,  ocean acidification, and species extinction.

So like me, I am sure you want to do every thing you can in your personal life and your civic life as a voter in the U.S.–the second largest overall greenhouse gas polluter in the world–to shrink the world’s carbon footprint.  You’ve done all the easy stuff–tires are pumped up, light bulbs are switched.  And you’ve done the smart thing by joining CLF, supporting our work on climate change solutions like energy efficiency, renewable energy, clean cars, and public transportation.

Now there’s another thing you can do to reduce greenhouse gas pollution.  It’s something many of us have been meaning to do for years: LOSE WEIGHT.

That’s right, by finally shedding our unwanted pounds we could be contributing to carbon emissions cuts too.  According to the International Journal of Epidemiology, 2009, the world could save 1.1 Billion Tonnes in carbon emissions from transportation sources and from industrial food-production if a population of 1 Billion people went from being obese to being lean.  The study authors reason that the more weight a car or plane has to carry, the more fossil fuel it has to burn to get us where we are going.  In addition, the authors indicate that obese people need more food energy to make it through the day.  That’s more food we have to grow and transport to market referred to by one author as “the oil we eat.”

1.1 billion tonnes of carbon emissions is nothing to scoff at.  According to an EPA website: “[C]arbon dioxide emissions from oil combustion jumped 1.1 billion metric tons between 1960 and 2001, accounting for 40% of the total increase in U.S. carbon emissions. The transportation sector primarily drove this increase. Carbon dioxide emissions from coal also climbed 1.1 billion metric tons between 1960 and 2001, accounting for another 40% of the total increase in U.S. carbon emissions. Increased electricity generation from coal-fired power plants primarily fueled this rapid growth.”

The Journal of Epidemiology study thus provides us with yet another compelling reason to reform our big industrial food complex and the bad eating habits it’s fostered in America and other wealthy nations.  As Michael Pollan has observed : “Cheap food is going to be popular as long as the social and environmental costs of that food are charged to the future.”  Now we’ve got even more evidence that increased global warming pollution is among the many social and environmental costs we are charging to the future by fattening ourselves up.

This gives a whole new meaning to the term “Low carbon diet.”

Popularity: 2% [?]

From noon until 1:30PM, Boston University is hosting a forum for the U.S. Senate Candidates to discuss the environment and a new green economy.

The forum, moderated by NECN-TV’s Jim Braude, is taking place at Meltcalf Trustee Center – and it is being streamed live online.

Click here to watch the live stream.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Could a little paint and elbow grease fix this baby right up and get it ready for the coast of Florida?

Looking for the perfect holiday gift for the special do-it-yourselfer roughneck in your life? Here is a rare deal for you. Now that the Montara drilling platform in the remote Timor Sea is just a smoldering wreck its likely to be on the market soon at bargain prices. They say it couldn’t fail, but this low mileage, state-of-the-art, everything but fire-proof deep sea drill rig set the international oil cartels abuzz with its flamboyant four day blaze that rendered the quarter-billion dollar roman candle into an island of charred and twisted metal. In fact, everyone but the American media seemed to follow the story of the three month long oil spill that preceded the grand finale inferno. 

Actually, I don’t know what the future holds for the Montara rig (also referred to as “West Atlas” in some reports) but there has to be a few options that are better than spending more millions to put it back into the drilling business. How about using it as a movie set for the next dozen apocalyptic action thrillers? What about doing something useful such as recycling the rig into wind turbines? Or, is that too practical? Yeah, probably.

 Well, maybe it could be designated as a “Monument to Hubris and Stupidity” and at least pulled out of the water to rust away on shore.

Popularity: 1% [?]

When headlines in your local media regularly highlight mishaps at the old and infirm nuke plant in your neighborhood, you’d probably start to wonder whether it makes sense to keep feeding it fissile fuel for another twenty years.  That’s what we’re pondering here in Vermont, where Entergy Nuclear’s “Vermont Yankee” seems to be in the news–and lampooned in editorial cartoons–every other week.  Exhibit A:

Credit: Tim Newcomb http://www.newcombstudios.com/cartoons.html

Just two weeks ago, in a story headlined “Yankee Plant’s Reliability Questioned” Vermont Public Radio reported that Yankee’s owners failed to disclose the fact that the plant has storm drains that flow to the Connecticut River and have been contaminated with radioactive Cobalt-60.  Apparently, only “minute particles” of the raidoisotope have been found in the river sediments (thank goodness!) and the problem that led to the contamination was supposedly fixed years ago.  Nonetheless, Entergy Nuclear’s failure to tell the nuclear engineer hired by the Vermont Legislature to monitor Yankee’s operation about the problem doesn’t inspire great confidence.

Trying to keep up with all of Yankee’s well-publicized mishaps is no easy task.  Your friends at CLF have tried to make it easier for you with our new fact sheet “30 Big Mistakes (and counting): VERMONT YANKEE IS YANKING YOUR CHAIN.” You can get a copy by clicking here.

For those of you who’ve been keeping score already and who know that giving the operators of this plant another twenty years would be a big mistake on Vermont’s part, please take action!  You can tell the Vermont Public Service Board you don’t want another twenty years of having Vermont’s chain yanked by Yankee’s owners by clicking here or you can print out a copy of the “30 Big Mistakes” and send it to your Vermont state legislator.

Popularity: 2% [?]

In October 2008 CLF and three citizens petitioned NOAA to protect the Atlantic wolffish under the Endangered Species Act. You may recall the news headlines from that time such as “Protection sought for sea brute” or ”Group to seek protection for a toothy sea monster,” not to forget my personal favorite “Group seeks protection for ugly New England fish.”  The Atlantic wolffish is, apparently, considered unattractive by both humans and most headline editors. In any event, it’s largely true that wolffish are best known for their fang-like teeth. What can you say about the fact that their eating habits consist of crushing whole scallops and sea urchins — not to mention the occasional wayward crab? Check our video, courtesy of Jonathan Bird, of the wolffish in action. It’s an admitted charismatically gruesome fish, but there are those of us who love it.

So, after sitting patiently by the mailbox for almost 14 months we received the answer from NOAA: DENIED! No protection for you, wolffish!

How could that be? The number of wolffish being caught crashed 95% in less than 15 years, the species has been listed as a “Species of Concern” (two steps shy of an endangered listing) since 2004, numbers have not gone up since then, and even more wolffish habitat has been plowed by bottom trawls in the last half-decade. Well, says NOAA, there are a lot of them in Canada. How is that the case since Canada protected Atlantic wolffish under their Species at Risk Act several years ago? That may be, NOAA says, but fewer wolffish “will likely” be caught once the Amendment 16 fishery management plan for groundfish like cod and haddock gets into place. How can we be sure that will work since Amendment 16 is not yet approved and if it does get approved it still won’t go into effect until May of 2010? By the way, the New England Fishery Management Council, not known for its preservationist tendancies, voted to create a zero possession limit for commercial and recreational fishing. NOAA claims that “although Atlantic wolffish discard mortality rates are not specifically known” the catch and release of bycatch will help wolffish survive at a rate that “may be as high as 100%.” Can I ask another question here — how do you measure that 100% when the boats are out to sea with few onboard observers and the crew have no training in catch and release of wolffish?

Friends, can you see where I’m going with this? Let’s just say we have a lot of questions.

Popularity: 1% [?]

The Boston Common has a long history as a place  where social activism and change can flourish.  It is therefore not surprising that  Massachusetts college based climate activists chose this most historic of public spaces for a “Sleep Out”  since the Common is right in front of the Massachusetts State House and this particular campaign is focused on provoking legislative action in favor of clean energy.

These activists, and prominent guests and supporters like Dr. James Hansen the most prominent climate science in the United States, made the decision to stick out on the Common through the night despite the Boston Police showing up to issue citations for being in the Common after the 11 PM “closure” of the park.

The number of people who are willing to publicly call for civil disobedience of this type is far greater than those willing to undertake it.  The willingness of these activists to take a stand, despite negative consequences, is worth noting.

As a poet of an earlier generation noted “Things fall apart; the centre can not hold” when “The best lack all conviction while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.”  It is always a good sign when the situation goes the other way; when good intentions and goals are found among those who are full of passionate intensity.

Popularity: 1% [?]

A pending bill in the Massachusetts legislature would set up a reasonably good system for facilitating the siting of wind energy facilities in Massachusetts.   Conservation Law Foundation and a group of allies have placed on the public record a letter supporting this bill and responding to issues raised by opponents.   We urge Massachusetts residents to educate themselves on this issue and to make their voices heard.

Popularity: 1% [?]

Anyone who has ever authored anything relating to global warming that was posted on even a moderately popular website knows that this is a topic that brings forth legions of trolls lurking in the tubes of the interwebs in web “comments.”

My recent Boston Globe Op-Ed (which also was posted on this blog) unleashed just such a torrent.

Fortunately, some sanity prevailed in the later comments as a fellow who goes by “freejung” posted some smart responses with links to good resources at the end of the comment string.

He highlights the letter from 18 of the most respected science organizations to the Senate on the subject as well as an interesting list of web resources.

Perhaps the most interesting development in the collapse of climate change denial as socially and intellectually acceptable is the news that Senator Inhofe of Oklahoma appears to stand alone as the last “flat earther”, to use the words of a Washington Post columnist.   That column quotes a number of Inhofe’s colleagues who don’t support particular bills but do believe in the science:

“Eleven academies in industrialized countries say that climate change is real; humans have caused most of the recent warming,” admitted Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.). “If fire chiefs of the same reputation told me my house was about to burn down, I’d buy some fire insurance.”

An oil-state senator, David Vitter (R-La), said that he, too, wants to “get us beyond high-carbon fuels” and “focus on conservation, nuclear, natural gas and new technologies like electric cars.” And an industrial-state senator, George Voinovich (R-Ohio), acknowledged that climate change “is a serious and complex issue that deserves our full attention.”

Popularity: 1% [?]

The continued flow of oil into the Timor Sea north of Australia previously presented on this blog

"PTTEP ERG Media" via Australian Broadcasting Company

is both a general example of the many kinds of harm that flow from uncontrolled fossil fuel use and a specific example of why talk about new drilling techniques being safe should be viewed with great skepticism.

News reports tell us that the flow of oil into the sea from the drilling platform continues and in a really sad new development the platform burst into flames during an attempt to close down the well.

And now there is video of the situation.  Note the spokesman for the oil exploration company admitting that the fire is out of control.

And yes the Australian Environment Minister Peter Garrett who is in part responsible for dealing with this is the same Peter Garrett who was the lead singer of Australian rock band Midnight Oil.  Only a matter of time until someone asks how he can sleep while the rig is burning, to paraphrase their biggest hit.

Popularity: 1% [?]