Building an American Clean Energy Economy from America's Building Trades Unions on Vimeo.

Read the rest of this entry »

Yahoo:

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration will again require federal agencies to consult with the government’s wildlife experts before taking any actions that could impact threatened or endangered species.

The Interior and Commerce departments said Tuesday they have revoked a last-minute rule change by the Bush administration that ended the consultation requirement. Environmentalists had argued that the Bush action severely reduced protection under the federal Endangered Species Act.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said by reimposing the requirement on agencies, it ensures that animals, fish and plants in danger of extinction “receive the full protection of the law.”

Via TED: Ideas Worth Spreading.

Bad news:

An area of an Antarctic ice shelf almost the size of New York City has broken into icebergs this month after the collapse of an ice bridge widely blamed on global warming, a scientist said Tuesday.”The northern ice front of the Wilkins Ice Shelf has become unstable and the first icebergs have been released,” Angelika Humbert, glaciologist at the University of Muenster in Germany, said of European Space Agency satellite images of the shelf.

Here is a satellite image of the collapsed ice front:

For perspective, here is where the shelf is located:

This is interesting:

What’s in a name? U.S. pork producers are finding that the name of the virus spreading from Mexico is affecting their business, prompting U.S. officials to argue for changing the name from swine flu.

The article continues:

And there is growing sentiment in the farm sector to call it the North American virus — although disease expert Anthony Fauci told a Senate hearing the “swine flu” designation reflected scientific naming protocol.

For U.S. pork producers the swine flu name has hurt, forcing government officials into the position of stressing that American pork is safe to eat and that other countries should not ban imports.

Pork, soybean and corn prices have fallen in the last two days, “and if this continues, obviously you have significant potential, which is why it’s important to get this right,” Vilsack said.

Their fears appear to be justified.

If a Senator changes parties for political expediency, and he still doesn’t vote with the party he is joining, should anyone care? Here is what some green bloggers and environmental organizations are saying about Specter’s switch.

Kate Sheppard at Grist:

Specter has been a hard senator to peg when it comes to environmental policy. While he acknowledges the problem of global warming and believes legislative action should be taken, he’s favored industry-friendly approaches to a cap-and-trade system that fall short of what most scientists and environmentalists argue is needed.

Brad Johnson at The Wonk Room:

Ideologically, Specter is in line with Democrats like Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN), who worries that Obama’s clean economy proposal may “suck money” from his state, Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), who is “against forcing petrochemical companies” to “bear the brunt of new costs,” and Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE), who worries cap and trade “could have a negative impact on our economy.”

Specter, whose top donors include the electric utilities Exelon Corporation and PPL Corporation, has told Pennsylvania students that “his main platform in running for re-election is global warming.” There’s still time for him — and the Democrats he’s joining — to build that platform, but more change will have to come.

Read the rest of this entry »

SET Energy has the great news:

I braced myself for the American Wind Energy Association’s quarterly report, thinking the sinking economy would lead to slower wind deployment in the US. But then I got the just-released report, and they showed another record wind deployment for the first quarter! The US added 2.8 GW from January-March, twice the growth in the same period of 2008 and the highest amount recorded during a first quarter.

Pretty incredible, especially given the economic environment right now.

Tucked away on page two of this MSNBC story, the headline jumps out:

And by a 58-to-35 margin, they favor charging a fee to companies that emit greenhouse gases — even if that will results in higher utility bills — and using that money to provide tax cuts for middle-class Americans.

Here are a few highlights from the full study (pdf):

Spending $120 billion in government funds over the next decade to develop clean energy technology. Approve-Disapprove = 68-27.

Charging a fee to companies that emit greenhouse gases, which might result in higher utility bills, and using the money to provide tax cuts for middle-class Americans. Approve-Disapprove = 58-35.

The next question goes even further in affirming the level of support for a cap and trade program. Without even mentioning the dividend check Americans will end up getting under the program if Democrats get their way, support is still solid:

Would you approve or disapprove of a proposal that would require companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming, even if it would mean higher utility bills for consumers to pay for the changes? Approve-Disapprove = 53-40.

Republicans are using the “energy tax” argument to scare Americans into opposing cap and trade. But it is also Republicans who want to structure the program so polluting industries, rather than American consumers, would receive the resulting dividend (rebate check). Either way, the data above shows that Americans are concerned first and foremost with capping C02, while the potential for minimal increases in utility prices is a mere afterthought.

Thanks to Bill Scher of Campaign for America’s Future for the heads up on this story.

Kevin Grandia has the new ad from Avaaz.org:

Kevin writes:

As President Obama hosts the world’s 17 largest economies to discuss a new desperately-needed global binding treaty on climate change, the oil, coal and gas companies are in overdrive trying to undermine the process and maintain their profits.

And Avaaz.org is calling out the worst of the bunch, ExxonMobil Corp., in a new commercial they want to run on CNN.

Want to see that ad on TV? Give Avaaz $10.

Great timeline from NRDC.

I’m having a hard time embedding it, so you can check it out here.