Crude Politics

Jun 8, 2011 by  | Bio |  Leave a Comment

With gas prices hovering around $4 a gallon, many New Englanders are rightfully asking why we’re paying so much at the pump. Many economists will point to price speculation and other factors such as political unrest and conflicts in oil producing nations. Oil industry reps have been claiming that high prices are due to all that clean air we use and all those required practices that help keep workers safe. They seem to think our leaders in congress should reduce environmental regulations put in place after the BP oil spill.

The fact of the matter is that domestic production has little to do with the price of oil, which is set on the world market.  In fact last year US oil production reached its highest levels since 2003.

David Koch — a billionaire oilman widely known for funding campaigns to discredit climate science and oppose the construction of clean, renewable wind energy projects—has launched a new campaign through his group “Americans for Prosperity” to convince us that environmental regulations are to blame for high gas prices. Furthermore, they are looking to target political leaders who support tougher safety and environmental reviews for the oil industry that could prevent another catastrophic spill, and the clean energy sources that could break our addiction to their oil.

While most serious economists will tell you that the conflict in Libya, and soaring demand for gas in emerging economies such as China are the key factors driving energy prices up, most serious economists don’t have billions of dollars to spend on massive PR campaigns and secret political donations. As mentioned in this story the Koch brothers are betting that their ad campaigns and political donations will be enough to convince our leaders in congress to ignore real solutions and instead weaken environmental regulations.

Unfortunately, we’re seeing signs that their campaign is working.  As I wrote last week, the US House of Representatives recently passed three bills that would have required massively expanded offshore drilling all around the country, including in New England.  Thankfully, the Senate voted down a similar measure, but oil industry supporters have vowed to keep up the fight. Unfortunately when faced with a decision between big oil and New Englanders who depend on a healthy ocean, Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown sided with big oil. Click here to hear the radio ads CLF is running across the state, and here to write Senator Brown to urge him to stand with us in opposition to expanded drilling and for real solutions to high gas prices.

CLF and NRDC Take Scott Brown to Task in New Radio Ads

Jun 3, 2011 by  | Bio |  4 Comment »

Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown has been striking a defensive pose in recent weeks as non-profit groups and the thousands of Massachusetts voters they count as members called him out about his votes on the environment. A new radio ad from CLF and NRDC, launching today in major markets across Massachusetts, asks Brown to explain his latest votes in support of big oil, approving the continuation of huge subsidies for oil companies and opening up New England’s oceans (among other areas) to new offshore drilling. Brown’s rhetoric setting up a false choice between protecting the environment and creating a thriving Massachusetts economy is ringing hollow. We wonder what his response will be this time.

Siding with Big Oil – Senator Scott Brown by conservationlawfoundation

TAKE ACTION NOW! Tell Senator Scott Brown to protect our coasts, not big oil.

TIME’S RUNNING OUT! Tell your senators to protect our oceans and coasts, not open them up to offshore drilling!

May 18, 2011 by  | Bio |  3 Comment »

Another important Senate vote comes today around 2:30ish when the pro-drilling bill S.953, introduced by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, is scheduled to be voted on. This bill hides behind a fig leaf of a drilling ”safety improvement” by requiring a spill response plan, but it really seeks to increase drilling by requiring leasing off the coast of Virginia and in the Arctic and setting a deadline that all proposed leases have to be decided in 60 days. McConnell’s bill also restricts court access for an legal action against a drilling operation. Is the oil industry really in need of legislation that limits court access away from the public’s interest? Isn’t the playing field already more than a bit skewed in favor of the industry that seems to create a new lobbying PAC each year?

TAKE ACTION NOW!

- SEND AN E-MAIL to your senators via CLF’s action alert and tell them to vote to protect our oceans and coasts, not open them up to oil drilling.

- CALL your senators through the US Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and urge them to oppose the McConnell dirty drilling bill.

The Face of Responsibility

May 20, 2010 by  | Bio |  Leave a Comment

Tony Hayward of BP

The BP oil disaster has now reached its one month anniversary. No viable solutions are at hand for shutting down the underwater geyser, cleaning up the soiled marshes or restoring the damaged economies of coastal communities. The “outhouse” failed and the “top hat,” “top kill” and “junk shot” are still theories. What’s the performance assessment from the BP CEO? “Extraordinarily successful.” In fact, if BP continues on their chosen strategy, says Man at the Helm Tony Hayward, it just might be an improvement for their reputation!  Bravo Tony. Shirley Temple‘s sunny outlook pales in comparison.

The arrogance seen on display is not new. It’s the same gall we have seen in the Congress with Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s incredible response that the solution to the BP oil disaster is to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It’s the same predicted blindness we have seen from the industry spokesmodels who were scolded by President Obama last week. This is the same greed that has other oil companies rushing to seek 20 new waivers from environmental analysis for offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico SINCE the Deepwater Horizon erupted.

The Obama Administration has taken some much needed action to establish an independent investigation commission and to – finally – address the rat’s nest of collusion and corruption at Minerals Management Service. We are thankful to have New England’s Rep. Ed Markey and Sen. Bernie Sanders helping to lead reform. Other areas of the country which are faced with new oil drilling such as the coast of Virginia are seeing the real face of oil, not the shiny industry portrayal. But, why wait any longer? We need real action. We need President Obama to reinstate the 20 year moratorium on oil drilling.

Mercy, mercy, mercy

May 10, 2010 by  | Bio |  Leave a Comment

In probably the most honest headline published since the start of the BP oil disaster, today’s Miami Herald writes “With no clear plan, experts brace for worst.” US Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen is contemplating an attempt at plugging the gushing well with a collection of shredded tires, golf balls and other assorted technologically advanced clogging materials. Meanwhile, the BP spokesperson on the scene says, “I have every confidence we’ll find a good temporary solution.” When asked for particulars he revised his confidence to say he has every “hope and prayer.” Another step towards honesty. “Sometimes we are not prepared for adversity,” as Cannonball Adderley once said. Why not approach adversity with honesty?

Oil booms, chemical dispersant, skimmer boats and prep to wash oily wildlife are the basic tenets of oil spill response. For all the creativity and commitment to get oil out of the ground, into your tank and the money in the bank we sure have not made much progress in disaster preparedness or oil clean-up. Every oil spill from the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill, the Exxon Valdez and the smaller spill of fuel oil in Buzzard’s Bay in April of 2003 employed the same four components. What is being employed in the Gulf Coast today is the same approach on a larger scale. It’s no mystery why this is the case. Unless the oil industry feels the pain through fines, regulations and criminal responsibility there will always be an incentive to cut corners, cross fingers and place confidence in “hope and prayer.”

Philosphers and theologians can weigh hope and prayer, but most of us use the standard yardsticks of oil disaster measurement. The BP oil disaster, although likely low-balled, now has its own ticker. The US Coast Guard estimates there have been 250,000 gallons of Corexit, the chemical dispersant of choice, sprayed on or in the ocean so far. The Gulf of Mexico dead zone was over 7000 square miles before the BP oil disaster. There are about 77,000 miles of coastline in Louisiana alone. And then we have about 900,000 feet of plastic oil containment boom placed along Gulf Coast shores. There are still 5280 feet in one mile.

Whales, oil spills and whose fault is it in the end?

May 2, 2010 by  | Bio |  1 Comment »

Understandably, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico (which seems to be the first oil spill to have a Facebook page) has been the subject of intense interest on this blog (repeatedly), in New Orleans (which incredibly finds itself in the cross-hairs of ANOTHER disaster) and in nearby Florida, where brilliant and acerbic environmentalist Carl Hiaasen (buy his books, especially the ones for kids) makes his mark on the subject.

But here is a different angle on the disaster. Consider the recent episode here in New England where a quarter of the population of Right Whales were spotted feeding in an area where whales are not normally found. This reminds us that putting an inherently dangerous activity like oil and gas drilling anywhere in the ocean is like playing Russian roulette with the lives of the animals that live in the ocean and our oceans generally.  A lesson that is playing out among the sea turtles who rely on the Gulf of Mexico as a safe place to reproduce.

So what can we do? The first thing is to not open up even more of our coastline to drilling, especially as part of a climate bill that is intended to protect and restore our environment. But the ultimate answer is to reduce use of , and therefore demand for, oil. And that means, more than anything else, reducing our gasoline consumption. How do we do that? Building smart walkable communities with transit options and using far more efficient cars would be a great start.

We have the seen the enemy and it is us . . . but it doesn’t have to be that way forever.

Hard lessons from the hard rain

Apr 1, 2010 by  | Bio |  Leave a Comment

Our hearts go out to New Englanders dealing with the flood disaster caused by record-setting rainfall over the last couple days.  The director of CLF’s Rhode Island Director, Tricia Jedele, has circulated some extraordinary pictures of the deluge that really bring home the scope of the devastation.

The tragic events playing out on the ground in Rhode Island–flooding and subsequent failure of public health infrastructure like sewage treatment plants–have been eerily predicted as likely outcomes of human-caused climate change.  But when you see the destruction occurring in Rhode Island and elsewhere in southern New England, you realize that terms like ”climate change” or even “global warming” are grossly inadequate descriptions of what is really going on: total climate chaos.  

CLF's Rhode Island Director Tricia Jedele documented the awesome, destructive power of the Pawtuxet River swollen by intense rains.

Here are just some of those eery predictions taken from a 2008 EPA National Water Program strategy document titled “Response to Climate Change” at p. 11 (note that this document was created during the Bush Administration so it probably underplays the science a bit).  The report cites the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) conclusion that “annual mean precipitation is very likely to increase in Canada and the northeast United States” as a result of climate chaos.  It concludes that the climate chaos we are causing with our greenhouse gas pollution will “alter the hydrological cycle, especially characteristics of precipitation (amount, frequency, intensity, duration, type) and extremes” p. 10 The report also concludes that: 

increased frequency and intensity of rainfall in some areas will produce more pollution and erosion and sedimentation due to runoff (EPA 2007h);
“[w]ater-borne diseases and degraded water quality are very likely to increase with more heavy precipitation” (IPCC 2008, p. 103);
potential increases in heavy precipitation, with expanding impervious surfaces, could increase urban flood risks and create additional design challenges and costs for stormwater management” (Field et al. 2007, p. 633);
flooding can affect water quality, as large volumes of water can transport contaminants into waterbodies and also overload storm and wastewater systems (EPA 2007h)

Tens of thousands of homeowners in Warwick and West Warwick are learning firsthand how flooding can shut down wastewater systems, badly contaminating the rivers and backing raw sewage up into people’s homes.  Yesterday’s Providence Journal reports that it may take days or even weeks to get the plants in those communities up and running again.  

The serious water pollution is not limited to raw sewage.  Today’s Burlington Free Press carries a stunning AP photo of a massive oil slick running through a flooded industrial area near the Pawtuxet River under the headline “Worst Flooding in 200 years.”  The story goes on to recount the serious damage to bridges, highways, dams, and personal property caused by the floodwaters throughout New England.  Incidentally, right next to the headline about flooding, the Free Press reports that “Vermont headed for record heat” this weekend. 

Sadly, above the stories on record-breaking flooding and record-breaking heat in the Burlington Free Press , the top headline reads “Obama expands drilling.” 

We must learn the hard lessons from this hard rain: Climate chaos is happening and it is already costing our society billions in hidden costs associated with climate disasters like the recent flooding.  The longer we wait to take serious actions to stem our emissions of greenhouse gases, the higher the price we will have to pay.  This week, the price is being measured in destroyed infrastructure, lost productivity from businesses that must stay closed during flood disasters, badly-contaminated-disease-bearing water, displacement of people whose homes are destoryed, and the list goes on.  

The message that Tricia Jedele sent along with her pictures brings home another point about the environmental justice aspects of this most-pressing human problem. ”There is a connection here to how our failure to respond appropriately to climate change and address adaptation will disproportionately impact the poorer communities.  The small mom and pop, main street types of businesses will be hardest hit.”

These costs MUST be part of the cost-benefit analysis that is driving debates over issues like expanding offshore drilling for more fossil fuels to burn in America’s cars.  When your car is under water and the bridges and roads you need to drive on are too, are you really all that excited that we sacrificed our oceans and increased our reliance on the fuel sources causing climate chaos, all so we could save 3 or 4 pennies per gallon at the pump?

For Energy Independence, Offshore Drilling Is Not The Answer

Mar 31, 2010 by  | Bio |  1 Comment »

Since 1977, CLF has led efforts to block offshore drilling in the North Atlantic, particularly in the area of Georges Bank. CLF’s efforts were instrumental in winning drilling moratoria in Georges Bank through 2012.

This morning, President Obama announced new plans for offshore drilling. Here’s what Priscilla Brooks, Ph.D., CLF’s Ocean Conservation Program director, had to say.

“The Gulf of Maine is a national treasure and Georges Bank an economic engine for many of New England’s coastal communities.  While we are pleased that the Administration chose to spare those and other important national marine resources in the Pacific and Alaska from this new wave of offshore prospecting, we are dismayed that the Obama administration feels it politically expedient to continue the prior administration’s pursuit of the destructive and risky business of oil and gas drilling off our shores,” Brooks said. ”Not only does that pursuit threaten unique underwater habitats, fisheries and marine wildlife, but it is the wrong solution to the twin challenges of achieving energy independence and addressing climate change.  We can’t drill our way to a solution for either challenge. If we are to break our country’s addiction to fossil fuels, we need to go boldly down the path of clean energy like greater efficiency and renewable power from wind, waves and sun and not be diverted by these distractions. We reject the notion that continuing to pursue extraction and burning of fossil fuels over a long time horizon is a necessary component of a comprehensive energy and climate solution.”

If you would like to speak with Priscilla or CLF vice president Peter Shelley, please contact CLF communications director Karen Wood at (617) 850-1722, or you may contact them directly at the numbers below:

Priscilla Brooks, CLF, (617) 850-1737
Peter Shelley, CLF, (617) 850-1754