TCPR’s Campaign of Misinformation about Al Gore’s Energy Use

There’s a lot of misinformation out there about Al Gore’s energy consumption, and the Tennessee Center for Policy Research is behind most of it. This ‘research organization’, which declines to identify where it gets its funding, has now put out two press releases detailing what they call Al Gore’s “massive home energy use”, citing information from the Nashville Electric Service.

According to the TCPR, Gore, who they call a “global warming alarmist”, is wasting tons of energy while laughing all the way to the bank with “global warming hysteria” profits. From their June 17th, 2008 press release:

“A man’s commitment to his beliefs is best measured by what he does behind the closed doors of his own home,” said Drew Johnson, President of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research. “Al Gore is a hypocrite and a fraud when it comes to his commitment to the environment, judging by his home energy consumption.”

In the past year, Gore’s home burned through 213,210 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity, enough to power 232 average American households for a month.

Since taking steps to make his home more environmentally-friendly last June, Gore devours an average of 17,768 kWh per month – 1,638 kWh more energy per month than the year before the renovations. By comparison, the average American household consumes 11,040 kWh in an entire year, according to the Energy Information Administration. The cost of Gore’s electric bills over the past year topped $16,533.

Their first press release on the subject, released last February the day after Gore won an Academy Award for his documentary An Inconvenient Truth, trumpeted similar claims. The problem is, the data that the TCPR gained from public records is from a period of time when Gore’s home was in the midst of a three-year renovation, which naturally caused a temporary increase in power usage. Since then, the home has been praised as one of the country’s most environmentally friendly.

‘Short of tearing it down and starting anew, I don’t know how it could have been rated any higher,’ said Kim Shinn of the non-profit U.S. Green Building Council, which gave the house its second-highest rating for sustainable design. [Denver Post]

Al Gore’s spokesperson Kalee Krieder refuted the TCPR’s allegations to the Nashville Post on June 18th:

I am happy to provide more information about this from the Gores’ perspective. First, this release yesterday are [sic] a mere re-release of old bills. If any of you have ever worked with contractors, you know that renovations take years. The Gores renovated a 80 year old house from stem to stern. This took about 3 years to go through all the ducwork [sic], to install a geothermal system, to replace all the windows, to put in solar panels (which used to be illegal in Bellemeade and took 6 months to reverse).

So, to be clear, the Gores’ achieved Gold LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification in November 2007. The reduction in the electricity and natural gas bills–you need to look at both in order to truly evaluate their carbon footprint, really kicked in in 2008. At that point, evaluating both, there is about a 40 percent reduction.

Their natural gas bill has seen the biggest reduction as a result of the geothermal system. For electricity, they purchase green power through their utility, which is called “Green Power Switch.” It isn’t an offset, any customer can purchase green power (solar, wind, methane gas) and its a wonderful program.

Indeed, the TCPR chose to ignore the fact that the energy used by Gore’s home is now all green power, an omission that was repeated by Fox News’ Brit Hume on an airing of Special Report.

That’s not all. MediaMatters.org reports that on a February edition of MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Olbermann stated that the TCPR’s claims “omits several other key facts. The former vice president’s home has 20 rooms, including home offices for himself and his wife, as well as a guest house and special security measures. Furthermore, the Gores buy energy produced from renewable sources, such as wind and solar. Tonight, Countdown confirmed with the local utility officials that their program, called the Green Power Switch, actually costs more for the Gores — four dollars for every 150 kilowatt hours. Meaning, by our calculations, our math here, that the Gores actually chose to increase their electric bill by $5,893, more than 50 percent, in order to minimize carbon pollution.”

Furthermore, Gore donates all of the proceeds from An Inconvenient Truth – both the DVD and the companion book – to environmental causes. He also donated 100% of his Nobel Peace Prize award as well as his salary from the venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers to the Alliance for Climate Protection.

What motivates the TCPR to put out this misinformation? Is it a desire to make sure the public has the facts, or an attempt to kill the messenger by a group that seeks to discredit global warming?

TCPR is a global warming denial group actively working to discredit information about climate change and anyone who works to educate the public about it. The TCPR reportedly joined the ‘Civil Society Coalition on Climate Change’, a group that claims to have “been established as a response to the many biased and alarmist claims about human-induced climate change, which are being used to justify calls for urgent action by governments.”

TCPR ‘staff and scholars’ are made up of individuals who have supported anti-environment causes and/or received support from anti-environment groups. TCPR president Jason ‘Drew’ Johnson has a long background of working for groups that deny global warming and seek to discredit it. Others have openly called environmental activism “destructive”. MediaMatters.org has some of the details:

Further, as part of the Charles G. Koch Summer Fellow Program, Johnson interned at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) in 2002. As MSNBC host Keith Olbermann noted on the February 27 edition of Countdown, Johnson worked at “the same American Enterprise Institute that takes money from big oil, cheerleads the war in Iraq, and consistently, and now to pretty consistent laughter, downplays global warming.” Indeed, AEI has received nearly $1 million in funding from ExxonMobil in recent years. Moreover, according to The Washington Post, AEI “has been soliciting critiques” of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report released in February and “has offered $10,000 to academics willing to contribute to a book on climate-change policy.”

TCPR scholar Charles Van Eaton also serves as a trustee for the Lincoln Heritage Institute (LHI). The institute’s “About LHI” page declares: “We … cannot stand idly by and allow … destructive environmental activism … to become an accepted way of life in America.”

The Department of Revenue commented to the Nashville Post – in a story that has since been deleted from their website – that the TCPR is “not a legitimate organization”.

When it comes down to it, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research’s attempts to discredit Al Gore and paint him as a hypocrite are a pathetic effort to derail the climate change awareness movement. As important as Al Gore has been and continues to be for climate change awareness, he is only a very small part of a growing urgency to act. The world is starting to wake up, and no matter how hard groups like the TCPR may try to stop it, the movement to act on climate change is going to keep on rollin’.

Link [TCPR] + [MediaMatters.org] + [Washington Post]

Cyclist Killed by Car During ‘Bike to Work Week’

A 22-year-old cyclist participating in ‘Bike to Work Week’ was killed on Monday when the owner of an SUV opened their car door in his path. He was riding in the bike lane. Clinton Miceli was the fifth bicyclist to die in Chicago so far this year. WTF, people. Can we really not manage sharing the road with cyclists? Is it that hard to go a little slower, avoid going around blind curves at high speeds and give these people some room?

The Chicago Sun-Times has it:

Miceli, 22, was cycling in the bike lane on La Salle around 6:45 p.m. Monday when he slammed into an open SUV door, was thrown from his bike, then struck by a second car. The driver of the Nissan Xterra who opened the door into Miceli’s path was cited for opening a car door in traffic, police said.

A second rider collided with a CTA bus around 8:50 a.m. Tuesday at Broadway and Patterson in Lake View. That cyclist was taken to Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center in serious condition, a Fire Department spokesman said. The CTA driver was cited for failure to yield and suspended without pay, authorities said.

First of all, it never fails to amaze me when people throw their car doors open without checking first to see if there’s anyone coming. Second, you would think that drivers would be a little more conscious, especially during ‘Bike to Work Week’. But everyone is so preoccupied with cell phone conversations, iPods, fiddling through their purses, putting on mascara, eating Big Macs or just plain zoning out. Wake up. Bicyclists have a right to safety on our roads.

Link [Chicago Sun-Times]
Photo credit: Flickr user borkur.net

The Dumbing Down of America Under Bush

America has become a nation of idiots.

I think the point where I really started to worry was when people began using the phrase ‘freedom fries’ as a substitute for ‘french fries’. It spread like syphilis at a Roman orgy after France refused to take part in the invasion of Iraq, when anti-France sentiment grew here in the U.S. and two Republican congressmen decided to officially change the name in the restaurants and snack bars run by the House of Representatives. ‘Dang it all, Jeb, if the Republican gov’ment says it, then we should too! Those fancy French people, they’s all disloyal and anti-American and stuff!’

As if that weren’t enough, frighteningly, we seem to be endlessly entertained by crotch gags, like the ‘Ow My Balls!’ segments on America’s Funniest Videos. Some of the most popular programs on television are those that depict people eating bull testicles, transforming themselves into scary plastic mannequins via dozens of plastic surgery procedures, intentionally trying to hurt themselves in the stupidest ways possible and competing for the dubious affections of a man wearing a giant clock around his neck.

Then there are the email forwards. Christ on a bicycle, people, would you please verify that the information you’re about to send is correct before forwarding it to 98 of your closest friends, relatives, business associates and random acquaintances? I don’t know how many times I’ve had to direct the sender of a ridiculous email to Snopes.com to get the real story. It seems that many people are content to simply believe whatever is convenient for them to believe. If they want to convince themselves that Barack Obama really did go to terrorist training school, refuses to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and was sworn into office using the Koran rather than the Bible, they damn well will. [Read more]

Green Meme Killers: Ethanol Is Causing The Food Crisis

I’m sure you’ve heard it, just as we have, from self-righteous sounding friends and family. You know the sort: they think that global warming is a Marxist conspiracy to take over the world, and that environmentalists must be stopped. “The reason food prices are so out of control is because we’re sinking so much into ethanol and biofuels.” Wrong, wrong, wrong.

The meme generally goes like this:

Last year, food-to-fuel policies led to ¼ of U.S. corn being turned into ethanol. That number will rise to over 30% this year. By 2012 as much as 40% of our corn and 30% of our vegetable oils could be be diverted to fuel production.

This diversion of food crops is reducing the supply of food and feed and contributing to food price inflation. Today, food prices in the US are rising at twice the rate of inflation. Globally, food prices rose 83% in the last 3 years.

Compelling evidence, right? Not quite. The reality is that while the U.S. is embracing ethanol on a growing scale, that’s not what is driving food prices through the roof. First, we have to consider that–and we don’t say this lightly, being a resident of a state the neither the midwest nor the south seems ready to claim–the weather in the farm belt has been batshit crazy lately. Why does that matter? It means that the 25% of corn that went to ethanol in 2007 isn’t the same 25% of corn that was cheaply available in, say, 2000. Last year it was the drought that almost killed Atlanta. In 2006? Another drought. 2005? A third goddamn drought. And of course, to make up for all of this in 2008, we so far have been having rains that would make Noah blush–if you think food prices are high now, wait until the next harvest–there’s 4 million acres of corn that didn’t get planted this year because the weather was too bad. The farmers have insurance and soybeans to fall back on. What do we have? Stocking up.

Which segues nicely to the second point: despite all of these shortages, food would still be cheap if it weren’t for futures trading. This is America, man! We make money off of everything, including corn crops that aren’t even in the ground yet. Shares of corn futures–bushels, just like a barrel of crude oil– are sold like stocks in a company, and the more crazy the weather acts, the more intense the demand is going to be for those shares. In 2004, futures closed at $2.4175. In 2008? $4.28. This isn’t about ethanol sucking up all the available corn–it’s about that corn being bought for, and in turn having to be sold for, way more money. Because the weather in the places that grow corn (see also: flyover country) has been biblically bad.

It’s not just corn, either–wheat is up, and so are soybeans, a reflection that this is a problem that’s striking in systemic fashion, not merely a symptom of the evil environmentalists convincing everybody that oil is bad. Not that we’re not trying to do that, too. But biofuels are innocent, and anybody that says otherwise has tunnel vision.

Green Meme Killers: Nukes Are Good For You

There’s been a lot of discussion lately about the viability of nuclear power; the loudest and most obnoxious voice in the chorus has been Wired magazine, who took it upon themselves to launch a bright orange cover telling us wacky enviro types that we should start gunning down spotted owls, guzzling pesticides, and give nuclear power a big hug.

Totally safe. For real. We promise this time. From Stuckincustoms.

The reason behind all this lunacy? Carbon Dioxide. Wired thinks that it’s the Holy Grail of the environmental movement, and the only concern that any of us should have for the next 75 years or so. Environmentalism, the magazine trumpets, is too important to be left to the environmentalists. Because we care too much about spotted owls to actually save the world.

Look at the environmental protection agency’s CO₂-per-kilowatt-hour map of the US and two bright patches of low-carbon happiness jump out. One is the hydro-powered Pacific Northwest. The other is Vermont, where a 30-year-old nuclear reactor, Vermont Yankee, keeps the Ben & Jerry’s cold.

Vermont! (Pub: I wonder what Simon Slade would say) How interesting that you bring that up, since it you assail it elsewhere in your arrogant little shot across the bow of the green community. But that’s merely a pet peeve. Let’s look further into that low-carbon happiness; the Pacific Northwest does draw power largely from hydro-plants, but once upon a time, it was on the nuclear bandwagon, as well. Actually, the Hanford Site, in Washington State, led the way for nuclear power in America: it was established in 1943 as part of the Manhattan Project, and has nine plutonium production reactors. What’s going on there? “Cocooning,” a process where the reactor is entombed in a case of steel, concrete, and lead, designed to be water, fire, tornado, and earthquake resistant for 75 years. Because maybe by then we’ll know what to do with the stuff inside. They don’t know what to do with it in Vermont, either: the Yankee’s storage pools are almost full, and still waiting for a federal repository to open somewhere. Because you know, Nuclear power is great in my state, but the leftovers need to go to somebody else’s. Of course, they may just be able to seal it off as well: a 2007 reactor SCRAM, the last safety option before a meltdown, has placed the operating license of the Vermont plant at risk. [Read more]

Food Manufacturers Ban Food Dyes in Europe to Protect Kids, but Not in the U.S.

We place a lot of trust in food companies. When you think about it, most people don’t bother to ever read the ingredients in the food they purchase, let alone go look them up to see what exactly they’re putting into their own bodies – and those of their children. The bottom line is, food companies are concerned with profits – not safety. You may associate major brands with quality, but that doesn’t mean they’re doing everything they can to ensure that the best possible ingredients go into your food. And I’m not even talking about fresh, organic ingredients – I’m talking about stuff that won’t harm you.

Numerous studies since the 1970’s have shown that food dyes are linked to hyperactivity and other disorders in children. The FDA has disputed these claims for decades, stating that the dyes undergo safety testing, but the fact is that the FDA doesn’t test the dyes themselves – they leave it up to manufacturers to do animal testing to see if dyes cause harmful effects.

From The Lohasian:

Although the FDA reports that some individuals are sensitive to Yellow #5 and break out in hives, the agency does not agree with the conclusions about ADHD or asthma or for that matter hyperactivity (that has been asserted in dozens of studies over the years). Recently the issue resurfaced when a consumer advocacy group known as the Center for Science in the Public Interest called for the FDA to outright ban their use.

The organization went on to point out how the British government is finding success pressuring manufacturers to phase out use of such dyes. Late last year, Mars banished artificial colors from its well-known Starburst and Skittles candies sold in the UK. Northfield-based Kraft did the same in early 2007 with its British version of Lunchables.

“This is about listening to consumers,” said Kraft spokesman Michael Mitchell.

Thus far, U.S. consumers haven’t spoken up enough to cause big manufacturers to drop the dyes. Kraft’s decision for safer dyes was based on public demand.

So basically, what it comes down to is that American consumers aren’t demanding safe food products for their children, and that’s a shame. Companies like Kraft, Mars and others can get away with using artificial dyes here – which make foods look more ‘vibrant’ than natural colorings – because people don’t seem to have a problem with it. If the FDA isn’t going to protect your kids, and food companies aren’t either, it’s up to you, folks – demand that these companies change their ways for the sake of your children. As The Lohasian puts it,

…how is it that for thousands of years children managed to remain nourished and happy without blue cereal ? What is the battle here really all about other than protecting manufacturers and the chemical companies manufacturing the dyes. What benefit do our kids really get from purple drinks, other than creating a threshold of unhealthy perceptions on nutrition. Do dyes need to be linked to hyperactivity to be considered bad for our kids?

Get more info about food dyes from the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

Link [The Lohasian] + [CSPI]
Photo credit: Flickr user *Micky

Czech President Klaus Whines About ‘Sacrificing Freedom for the Planet’

Who knew that the president of the Czech Republic is just another Republican in the vein of Bush and Cheney? Last week President Vaclav Klaus said he’s ready to debate Al Gore on global warming, but that “he [Gore]’s not too much willing to make such a conversation”. Klaus, if Al Gore gave in to every conservative douche that wanted to debate him about global warming, he’d never have time to eat or sleep. Klaus is pushing the English version of his book, which argues that environmentalism poses a threat to basic human freedoms. Egads.

From The Earth Times:

Klaus was speaking a the National Press Building in Washington to present his new book, Blue Planet in Green Shackles - What Is Endangered: Climate or Freedom?, before meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney Wednesday.

“My answer is it is our freedom and, I might add, and our prosperity,” he said.

Gore a former US vice president who has become a leading international voice in the cause against global warming, was co-winner of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. Gore’s effort was highlighted by his Oscar winning documentary film An Inconvienent Truth.

Klaus, an economist, said he opposed the “climate alarmism” perpetuated by environmentalism trying to impose their ideals, comparing it to the decades of communist rule he experienced growing up in Soviet-dominated Czechoslovakia.

“Like their (communist) predecessors, they will be certain that they have the right to sacrifice man and his freedom to make their idea reality,” he said.

“In the past, it was in the name of the Marxists or of the proletariat - this time, in the name of the planet,” he added.

Klaus is concerned that environmentalism will limit the continued rise of technology and progress. Because, apparently, progress means continuing with unsustainable, selfish, dirty practices that harm the planet and everything on it – including humans. Many conservatives that share Klaus’ viewpoints seem to feel as if progress and pollution-emitting technology are irreversibly linked – as if we can’t continue to move forward in a smarter, more sustainable way.

Klaus believes that the answer isn’t government regulations, but rather allowing the free market to address environmental concerns. Isn’t that just what we need? Let’s allow profit-hungry corporations to make all of the decisions that will determine whether we slow or stop our death march toward the destruction of the planet (the only one we have to live on, in case you forgot), or simply enjoy the sorts of modern money-making luxuries that we’re used to while we’re still around. Who cares about the generations to come?

Where did this idea come from, that we are so entitled to this lifestyle and all that comes with it, including spewing millions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere via factories, motor vehicles and other modern inventions? Global warming deniers continue to hide behind the faulty idea that scientific facts about global warming are nothing more than propaganda. They’re trying to turn the ‘greed’ accusation around on environmentalists, claiming that efforts to stop harmful practices is all part of a big conspiracy to take their precious money.

Poor Klaus. Change is scary, I know. You and all the other deniers here in our own country that chant the tired old “you’re taking away our American lifestyle” refrain can’t imagine a world without your coal-fired power plants, SUVs and ridiculously large homes. The thing is, no matter how frightened you are of a society that asks you to go without those things, climate change is much scarier. Perhaps you all just have a death wish: you want to perish clinging tenaciously to your dirty, comforting modern luxuries and leave the consequences for others to deal with. Well, honestly, most of us don’t care if that’s what you do. But we’re not going along with it. Lead, follow or get out of the way.

Link [Earth Times]
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

Conservative Group Plans to Waste Tons of Energy on ‘Carbon Belch Day’

Oooh, sometimes you hear a bit of news that makes you feel like you’re bordering on a killing spree fueled by murderous rage. This is one of those stories. Conservative grassroots organization Grassfire.org is calling for people to waste as much energy as possible on June 12th, telling people to do things like “hosting a barbecue, going for a drive, watching television, leaving a few lights on, or even smoking a few cigars”.

Information Week has it:

The point: the group wants to “help Americans break free from the ‘carbon footprint guilt’ being imposed by Climate Alarmists.”

Grassfire.org says it’s skeptical over claims that man-made sources of carbon dioxide emissions — from automobile exhausts to manufacturing plants — are raising the Earth’s temperature at a dangerous rate. Theories about global warming were highlighted by former Vice President Al Gore’s 2006 film, An Inconvenient Truth.

Grassfire.org president Steve Elliott, in a statement, said such theories are off the mark. “It’s time for Americans to purge ourselves of the false guilt that Al Gore and the Climate Alarmists have placed on us,” Elliott said.

Grassfire.org said it chose June 12 as the day it wants Americans to rev up their SUVs because it coincides with expected debate in Congress over a $1.2 billion carbon tax rebate program. “Carbon Belch Day will have at least as much impact on the so-called ‘planetary emergency’ of man-made global warming as the goofy save the earth mandates telling us to turn our lights off for an hour,” said Elliott.

If this sounds like an April Fool’s Day joke, check your calendar. It’s for real. There are actually douche nozzles like this out there in the world. These people really don’t get it – they’re living in a state of denial. No doubt, they’re part of the camp that thinks those of us who care about the planet we all live on and depend upon for survival are just trying to rob them of ‘the American way of life’. Because apparently, being an American means being a total self-absorbed asshole.

That’s right, conservative douchebags: watch out, we’re coming for you and your Norman Rockwell America. The one that exists SOLELY INSIDE YOUR OWN HEADS. We are bringing you reality, like it or not. Scratch that, you’re bringing it upon yourself with idiotic moves like Carbon Belch Day. Maybe you’ll be lucky and die before we start to see the real effects of how our wasteful lifestyle has harmed the planet, but your kids and grandkids may not be so lucky. So go on being selfish – it’s only the entire world at stake.

Link [Information Week]
Photo credit: Grassfire.org

Greenfest Chicago Followup: Silverleaf Resorts Snookered Organizers to Promote Timeshare Resort with Cruiseship Giveaway

What a week! I have felt down-right journalistic these past few days as I’ve poked and prodded my way though a story that first popped up during Chicago Greenfest a few weeks back; a story about Silverleaf Resorts, a very-NOT-green timeshare company giving away an even-less-green Cruise vacation smack in the middle of Greenfest Chicago.

We got their main booth rep Michael Stevens on camera saying that there was nothing green about Silverleaf Resorts or their promotion, that they were there “talking to all the people that love green”, and that they were just “marketing for our resort”. I was given a rambling, semi-incoherent answer to my very simple question “how are you green?” that wandered into the absurd. Apparently, in Silverleaf Resorts world, having 300 acres of land makes you Green.

You can read the original post here, watch the video for the full dirt:

After I got back from Chicago, I started zipping around emails to the two main orgs behinds Greenfest Global Exchange, Co-op America, and their PR firm Organic Works Marketing for an explanation on how Silverleaf Resorts got their booth. Did someone at Greenfest drop the ball in the screening process? Did Silverleaf “mis-represent” themselves in the application process?

It turned out to be a little of both- a small dash of the first and a heaping measure of the latter. Jim Kinsella of Silverleaf Resorts snookered to the organizers of Greenfest. Someone at Silverleaf Resorts verbally told the Greenfest screeners that they had two sites that were built with green materials and practices. I have yet to find any evidence of anything green from Silverleaf Resorts and they have failed to respond to my request for comment/clarification. But it’s clear that whoever was in charge of screening the Silverleaf Resorts application was too trusting and didn’t do the necessary footwork needed to verify their green claims.

Silverleaf Resorts promised the screeners that they would only exhibit information about one of their green facilities and made no mention of the cruise give-away.

During the Friday setup, the Greenfest Floor Manager didn’t see the giant Cruise banner SIlverleaf Resorts later put up and apparently didn’t do a walk through on either Saturday or Sunday, when I saw it up behind their booth.

If I had to wager, I’d guess that most of the exhibitors at Greenfest fall squarely into the Kind Greenie category of people. They’re mostly nice crunchy kind folks who don’t try to lie and cheat on their exhibitor application. I can see how it’d be easy for the organizers of Greenfest to get complacent.

I hope this serves as a wake up call to the great people running Greenfest. There are lots of Jim Kensellas and Silverleaf Resorts in the world and more of them will be trying to get into our space. Don’t make it easy for them- they’re welcome when they actually green themselves up, in the meantime we’ve got to keep beating them back down.

Newt Gingrich Claims to be an Environmentalist, Then Backpedals When It’s Inconvenient

It’s way, way too late for Newt Gingrich to get on the good side of liberals. So, when the former Republican congressman did an interview last fall with Salon and tried to paint himself as an environmentalist, it’s unlikely that anyone took him too seriously – aside from the handful of conservatives who may have read the piece and wondered where the hell his ‘green’ streak came from.

From the interview:

“Somebody who believes that the environment is part of our heritage, and we have an absolute obligation to try to maintain it, and develop it, and sustain it. And somebody who has reverence for the extraordinary complexity that God has created in the natural world.”

When speaking to his loyal followers, however, Gingrich goes in another direction entirely. Subscribers to his weekly newsletter received this tired spiel in their inboxes just last week:

For decades left-leaning politicians have advocated higher prices and less energy. They were going to save the environment by punishing Americans into driving less and driving smaller cars. Now their policies have succeeded with a vengeance.

The very left wing politicians who favored a policy of no oil and gas exploration, no use of coal, no development of nuclear power, and no aggressive development of new technologies are now panic-stricken that their policies of higher prices have led to higher prices.

Let’s ignore, temporarily, the many stupid things Mr. Gingrich said in the above two paragraphs (particularly the ‘punishing Americans’ bit, ugh, are Americans really so entitled?). Rather, the point of this piece is, in what universe is Newt Gingrich an environmentalist, and why can conservatives not see that while they point their fingers at liberal politicians and call them panderers, that their own politicians and figureheads are doing the same, if not worse?

The only place this irreverent political hack is an environmentalist is in Rush Limbaugh’s dreams and maybe in Bizarro World.

Link [Salon] + [Human Events]
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

FBI on the Trail of Dangerous Vegan Potluck Dinner Attendees

Dayum! So apparently we’re not the only ones who think militant vegans can get a little crazazy – the FBI is on their trail, too. Those wily wilesters are looking for a few good moles who aren’t afraid of stepping into those infamous dens of dissent – vegan potluck dinners.

College student Paul Carroll was called into a meeting at a coffee house with the campus police sergeant and a female FBI special agent. Carroll had previously been charged with a misdemeanor for spray-painting the inside of a campus elevator, and knew the police officer from when he turned himself in. What they had to say once he got there wasn’t exactly what he was expecting.

From City Pages:

“She told me that I had the perfect ‘look,’” recalls Carroll. “And that I had the perfect personality—they kept saying I was friendly and personable—for what they were looking for.”

What they were looking for, Carroll says, was an informant—someone to show up at “vegan potlucks” throughout the Twin Cities and rub shoulders with RNC protestors, schmoozing his way into their inner circles, then reporting back to the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force, a partnership between multiple federal agencies and state and local law enforcement. The effort’s primary mission, according to the Minneapolis division’s website, is to “investigate terrorist acts carried out by groups or organizations which fall within the definition of terrorist groups as set forth in the current United States Attorney General Guidelines.”

Carroll would be compensated for his efforts, but only if his involvement yielded an arrest. No exact dollar figure was offered.

“I’ll pass,” said Carroll.

Those vegans. You gotta watch out for them, seriously, what with their non-leather accessories, tofu and almond milk. They are some dangerous mofos who won’t hesitate to cut you if you dare to pledge your support for meat eating in their presence. As we speak, they’re covering their tracks so the FBI doesn’t find their secret vegan activist hideaways complete with seed bombs, trays of dairy-free bakery treats and posters of famous vegans Alicia Silverstone and Woody Harrelson. They are armed with PETA brochures and planning a terrorist infiltration of the Republican National Convention complete with dangerous ‘Go Vegan’ stickers and peacemongering propaganda.

Link [City Pages] via [BoingBoing]
Photo credit: Flickr user Joi

The ‘King of All Stupidly Unnecessary Packaging Award’ Goes to AT&T

There’s unnecessary packaging, and then there is STUPIDLY unnecessary packaging. This lands firmly in the latter category.

Brett from TUAW was recently on the receiving end of a shipment from AT&T that stretches the imagination. His package from AT&T was shipped via DHL 2-day and came with a plastic bag and an invoice for “75011 MISC iPhone PPA BAG … $0.00.”

Was that box and bag packaged by robots? Are AT&T box packers so numb to their job that they don’t actually notice what they are working on? How did this dumbass trip up happen?

I’m gonna order me 30 or so of those MISC iPhone PPA Bags, they’ll come in handy the next time I have to move.

Eco Fail.

Link [TUAW] via [Gizmodo]

Global Warming Deniers Pretend to be Scientists for Anti-Kyoto Petition

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine held a press conference yesterday announcing that 31,000 scientists had signed a petition rejecting the notion of man-created global warming. The problem is, most of these people aren’t even scientists.

Envirowonk checked it out, and what they found is pretty hilarious:

So what does it take to be included among the 31,000 “experts” on the petition? Well, according to the OISM criteria, any undergraduate science degree will do just fine. Bet you never thought that BS you earned 20 years ago made you a qualified climatologist. Congratulations!

OISM also wants to let you know that 9,021 of the signers hold PhDs. They don’t specify what the doctorates are in, but they repeat that figure quite a bit, as if it means something. Since the group was nice enough to list all 31,000 signers, including the dead people, let’s take a look at the qualifications of three randomly-selected “climate experts.”

• W. Kline Bolton, M.D. is a professor of medicine and Nephrology Division Chief at the University of Virginia. Nephrology deals with the study of the function and diseases of the kidney.
• Zhonggang Zeng is one of the 9,000 with a PhD. He is a professor of mathematics at Northeastern Illinois University. His most recent publication is entitled “Computing multiple roots of inexact polynomials.”
• Hub Hougland is a dentist in Muncie, Indiana. He was inducted into the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame last year.

My, my. If these three were just randomly selected, I’d love to see a full list of how many of these ‘scientists’ are really school cafeteria ‘food science technicians’, garbage collector ‘sanitation engineers’ and mad-scientist-costumed partygoers.

Nice try, OISM, but this isn’t going to impress anyone with a brain.

Link [Envirowonk]
Photo credit: Party Theme Place

There’s Rocket Fuel in Our Water, and the EPA Says “Too Bad for You!”

In a world where we’re increasingly exposed to dangerous chemicals on a daily basis, thank goodness we have the EPA to protect us. After all, as their website states, their main goal is to protect human health and the environment. So when the EPA says that they’re not too concerned about a known toxic component of rocket fuel that harms fetuses and causes thyroid dysfunction being present in our water, I guess that means we’re in the clear, right?

Envirowonk has it:

However, they may issue a bulletin telling you that it might harm your unborn children, just so you know. At least it works out OK for the poor, impoverished Department of Defense, who’d have to fund the cleanup.

The EPA’s assistant administrator for water, Benjamin Grumbles, said he knew that perchlorate was toxic, but questioned whether regulation of drinking water was feasible or effective. He cited a Food and Drug Administration study released in January that found 81 percent of perchlorate intake by infants comes from baby foods and dairy foods, and that 74 percent of the 285 distinct foods tested contained the chemical.

Grumbles’ point that drinking water isn’t the only source of perchlorate intake is well-taken, but we’d rebut that by noting that the study he cited only dealt with infants, not adults, who are more likely to drink significant amounts of tapwater. Also, given the EPA’s jurisdiction over water pollution in all forms, not just drinking water, the fact that it’s present in food doesn’t seem to be a barrier to regulating its presence in surface and groundwater used for irrigation and livestock watering too.

Oh, I see. A bulletin warning us is enough to protect us. Plus, if it’s already in baby food and dairy, then why not just give up? We’re screwed either way, right?

Thank you, EPA. Thank you for doing your job – the job that millions of Americans take for granted that you do thoroughly and correctly. I mean, it’s only our lives on the line. And, the lives of our children. When my baby comes out looking like Sloth, I know who to call.

Link [Envirowonk]
Photo credit: Warner Bros

Sean Hannity Dips Into the Desperation Well And Tries To Pin High Food Prices on Al Gore to Great Hillarity

Great Flying Spaghetti Monster. The pain! I am doubled over in pain from laughing so hard. I picked up on an item from the ‘raz about Faux News laying the blame for record high food prices on…

get this…

Al Gore.

Oh, the delicious pain of it all. The Republican party is in full retreat, they are losing Congressional races left and right in traditionally staunch GOP districts, are looking at a major drubbing in November, and are seeing huge demographic shifts to the left among young people, Hispanics, and even conservative Christians. Fox News ratings are down, right wing talking heads are being canceled every other week, and shilltards like Sean Hannity are reduced to using increasingly pathetic hit pieces like this, complete with scary music and ominous voice overs. Hannity and his dwindling audience of dead-enders are on the downslope of an eight year extreme right neo-con jihadic ciclejerk.

You can watch the hilarious video here.

Here’s a snip from the article that points out a few of the errors Fox News made in the report:

Hannity is correct that increased demand for biofuels is part of the problem. But there are other factors, too, that the “We report. You decide” network conveniently omitted. According to Time magazine, there are three other factors: One is the chronically low productivity of farmers in the poorest countries, caused by their inability to pay for seeds, fertilizers and irrigation. Another is the growing demand for food and the third, which Hannity would probably rather die than admit to, is climate change. Time reported that recent droughts in Australia and Europe cut the global production of grain in 2005 and ‘06. New York Times columnist and economics professor Paul Krugman says that high oil costs play a big role, too.
Hannity also failed to mention that U.S. policies subsidize the conversion of food into biofuels and are also to blame. Time criticizes that policy but notes a possible win-win solution: “There may be a case for biofuels produced on lands that do not produce foods–tree crops (like palm oil), grasses and wood products–but there’s no case for doling out subsidies to put the world’s dinner into the gas tank.”
Hannity went on to quote Gore in 1998 saying he was proud to “stand up for the ethanol tax exemption.” But Hannity didn’t mention that more recently — in 2006, for example — Gore endorsed cellulosic ethanol over corn-based ethanol.

Enjoy the last dying breaths of the Neo-Con revolution while it lasts. I, for one, look forward to looking deep into its eyes as they haze over in anticipation of the coming darkness.

Links [Fox News Video] & [News Hounds] via [Ecorazzi] via [Green Daily]

Until We Have Sun Shining Out Of Our Asses, We Should Switch to CFL Bulbs

You are my sunshine. My only sunshine.

The Shadow Yacht: The Perfect Way to Showboat Your Distended Bank Account (Literally!)

For the billionaire who has everything, including a grossly bloated environmental footprint, comes the Shadow Yacht: think of it as a garage for your main 400-foot boat. If you’ve never seen those specials on TV that highlight the amazing ways Middle Eastern oil billionaires find to waste their money, here’s a quick education in Disgusting Wealth 101.

The Wall Street Journal has it:

A shadow yacht is a trailer yacht for your megayacht — a floating garage of a sort that tags along with your main yacht to carry your collection of helicopters, cars, motorcycles, jet skis and motorboats. That way, when you pull up to the docks of Monaco in your 350-foot main yacht, you can also pull into the local restaurants in your personalized drophead Rolls, without having to endure the indignity of a rented limo.

The boats can also pack fuel, water, spare parts and supplies, allowing more remote travel.

Shadow Marine, of Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., is the main builder of shadow yachts, and they’ve sold two already — both to Middle Eastern clients. The company recently released a new model, called the Allure, which is much more plush than the earlier versions. Replacing the garage-like décor is an interior complete with six staterooms, a pool, sky lounge, theater, game room and mini gym.

For just $35 million, you can have a shadow yacht of your very own. It’s the perfect way to get back at your father for saying you would never be as rich as your 12 brothers, attract a plastic-tittied golddigging trophy wife, and can even secretly house your bevy of bleached blond, lucite-stripper-heels-wearing mistresses. It’s SO classy, y’all – Price Alwaleed Bin Talal Alsaud, net worth $20.3 billion, whose beautiful mug is pictured, agrees. Even better, you can convince yourself you’re doing something good for the environment: these babies are made from decommissioned oil-supply boats. Just ignore the fact that you’re using insane quantities of oil to run it, and you’re golden.

Link: [Wall Street Journal]
Photo credit: Wall Street Journal + YURI CORTEZ/AFP/Getty Images

The 5 People Responsible for Mankind’s Most Toxic Inventions

Just like the men whose inventions caused their own deaths, those who conceived the biggest man-made threats to the natural world had no idea what they were doing when they began. Men like Thomas Edison and Karl Benz likely saw fame, money and possibly even the good of mankind as the benefits of their innovative creations. Unfortunately for all of us, their inventions have instead damaged the environment possibly beyond repair and have the potential to continue making things much, much worse. As in, end of the world worse. Here are five guys who thought they were making something way cool, but whose ideas have turned out to be some of mankind’s most destructive inventions of all time.

Plastic- Invented by Leo Baekland

Leo Baekeland invented Bakelite, the first truly synthetic plastic in 1905. A combination of formaldehyde and phenol, Bakelite set the stage for all of the plastics that were to come. In the first few decades of its existence, plastic was hailed almost as a miracle substance – ads touting the wonders of ‘fantastic plastic’ made it appear to be the path to a futuristic world. Certainly, the world has never been the same since. While it undoubtedly made life more convenient, it has also become one of the most polluting substances known to mankind. Plastics contain chemicals like dioxin and pthalates, which are known to be harmful to humans and the environment. One frightening fact about plastic is that nearly every single piece ever produced still exists today. Plastic bags and bottles litter the earth in staggering amounts that multiply daily. To get an idea of how bad the situation really is, check out “World of Waste: America’s Mass Consumption in Images” at Eco-Chick.

Diesel Fuel- Invented by Rudolf Diesel

German engineer Rudolf Diesel began working on what would be known as the diesel engine in 1892. Diesel first designed his engine to be run on hempseed oil and other vegetable oils, which would have been a far better choice for the environment but is not as cheap as the petroleum distillate now commonly known as diesel fuel, or petrodiesel. Diesel committed suicide in 1913 due to financial issues. Although he didn’t live to see his engine implemented in motor vehicles, the fuel that we know as diesel fuel today was named after his invention.

Unfortunately, diesel fuel has proven to be one of the top sources of pollution - specifically, the dirtiest and cheapest type of diesel fuel available, bunker oil. Bunker oil is used to power large ships, which are quickly causing U.S. ports to be the top sources of pollution in the world. Petrodiesel is also responsible for the lovely thick clouds of black smoke you see streaming from the tailpipes of large vehicles. Poor Rudolf Diesel would probably not be too proud of the destruction that his invention spawned in the world and it’s rather ironic that he killed himself by jumping into the ocean from a large ship (albeit a steam powered one).

The Motor Vehicle- Invented by Karl Benz

Karl Benz is credited with the invention of the modern automobile after building and selling the first four-wheeled vehicle in 1893. He also designed and patented the internal combustion flat engine, and the Benz Patent Motorwagon became the first commercially available automobile in 1888. As they say, the rest is history, and motor vehicles now cover the earth and spew forth pollution like a biblical plague. The problem with automobiles isn’t limited air pollution; it’s also the strain on energy resources and contaminants that are left behind such as antifreeze, grease, oil and metals. The environmental destruction left in the wake of the motor vehicle affects our water sources and the soil in which we grow our food. The motor vehicle is the single easiest way to turn one human being into a polluting machine.

The Power Plant- Invented by Thomas Edison

One of history’s greatest and most celebrated minds, Thomas Edison, invented the first power plant in 1882. His invention of the incandescent light bulb three years previously had paved the way for electric power, causing him to form the Edison Electric Illuminating Company to build power stations in New York City. Pearl Street Station began generating electricity on September 4th of 1882, and ran on a single steam powered generator.

As the years passed, coal became a more common source of power, and by the 1920’s pulverized coal was the norm. The use of coal as fuel for electric plants has a wide range of environmental implications, not the least of which starts with coal mining, which causes severe erosion and results in the leaching of toxic chemicals into nearby waterways. Of course, coal mining has been going on for centuries, but has greatly accelerated in the past century due to its use in coal-fired power plants. Two-thirds of sulfur dioxide, one-third of carbon dioxide and one-quarter of total nitrogen oxide emissions in the U.S. are produced by the burning of coal. Asthma, respiratory diseases, smog and acid rain are just a few of the coal industry’s lovely side effects.

The Atomic Bomb- Developed by Leó Szilárd

Though many credit Albert Einstein with this invention, the person responsible is in fact Leó Szilárd, a Hungarian-American scientist who developed the idea of the nuclear chain reaction and created the Manhattan Project. Szilárd did enlist the help of Einstein in writing a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt encouraging the creation of a nuclear defense program, but that was the extent of Einstein’s involvement. This was during World War II, when the Nazis were known to be working on similar technology. As the war went on, Szilárd came to resent the way the military seized control of his invention and became deeply bitter about the use of the atomic bomb against civilians after Truman bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Though we haven’t yet experienced its full effects, the atomic bomb is perhaps the single biggest man-made threat to the environment. A small nuclear war would cause a global environmental catastrophe. A nuclear blast would create black smoke, firestorms and radioactive particles that would completely devastate the entire globe, and the immediate effects would create climate anomalies that would last at least 10 years. Nuclear weapons are far more dangerous to the earth than global warming, and as we speak, India and Pakistan are quietly ramping back up their nuclear programs. A nuclear war between India and Pakistan would kill millions and unleash catastrophic health and environmental problems.

Link [Neatorama} + [Eco-Chick] + [Wikipedia] + [LiveScience] + [The Indian]

Photo credit: Time Magazine, Wikimedia Commons, Wikimedia Commons, Wikimedia Commons, Wikimedia Commons

“Blue Gold”: T. Boone Pickens and the Privatization of Water

Imagine a future where water is more valuable than gold – where corporations have control over the public’s water sources, and everyone has to pay a premium for access. It’s a scary thought for most of us, but for T. Boone Pickens, it’s a dream he’s banking on.

When Pickens, a billionaire oil tycoon, purchased eight miles of bare scrubland in the Texas panhandle recently, some people were confused: there’s no oil in them there flatlands. What he’s interested in, though, isn’t black gold, it’s blue gold: water, contained within the Ogallala Aquifer partially located under the ranch. His plan was to build a pipeline from the aquifer to larger cities, selling the water as a commodity that, at least in his mind, would undoubtedly be in demand during times of drought.

While it seems like there should be some kind of law against doing such a thing, the groundwater laws in Texas and many other states make it easy to get away with. When the laws were put into place, water was so abundant and readily available that no one ever considered the idea that people might try to buy and sell it in this way. So when it was time to vote on allowing the creation of Pickens’ water district, the only people required to vote on it were the people who live on the land: Pickens, his wife and three employees.

From Bloomberg News:

Pickens “has pulled a shenanigan,” said Phillip Smith, a rancher who serves on a local water-conservation board. “He’s obtained the right of eminent domain like he was a big city. It’s supposed to be for the public good, not a private company.”

Pickens and his allies say no shenanigans are involved. Once the district is created, the board will be able to issue tax-exempt bonds to finance construction of Pickens’s planned 328-mile, $2.2 billion pipeline to transport water from the panhandle across the prairie to the suburbs of Dallas and San Antonio.

Pickens was recently in the news for spending big bucks on wind farms. His move toward investing in alternative energy doesn’t mean he’s an environmental activist, though: he’s in it for the money. While there’s nothing wrong with businesses making profits off products, policies and practices that are beneficial to the environment, Pickens’ past and present ventures make it clear he’s no friend to the earth. In fact, he’s admitted that he’s taking advantage of public fears about climate change, and he’s obviously not too concerned about the environmental impact of draining the Ogallala Aquifer.

Amidst current awareness about global warming, he feels confident that he’ll soon be making big money off the business of selling water. Population growth, prolonged droughts and the production of certain biofuels continues to put a tremendous strain on water resources, and Pickens doesn’t see why he shouldn’t pad his bank account as a result.

The Ogallala runs through an area of America that’s already threatened. Annual withdrawal from this aquifer is already outpacing the recharge rate by 300%. The amount of groundwater in the aquifer has been steadily declining in recent years. The government also faces a hurdle that billionaires with access to oil might be able to jump more easily: the rising cost of energy needed to pump water from the aquifer is making it tougher to access it. The USDA laments that “even in areas where the pumping depth is economical, geology limits pumping access as the water table declines”.

Undoubtedly, a public water crisis is brewing. While other countries have been suffering a lack of water for years, America has remained largely insulated from the problem. We’re only beginning to experience the effects of a water shortage, partially due to unscrupulous deals made by bottling companies like Nestle along with America’s dependence on bottled water. The more people buy bottled water, the less money goes into the public water system. Corporations with dollar sign fairies dancing in their minds see it as an opportunity to grab and wield control over the supply. In a country dominated by a ‘winner takes all’ capitalist attitude, that sets us up for trouble.

What exactly would the corporate privatization of water mean to the public? For one thing, water would no longer be considered something that all people have a right to. It would be a commodity, bought and sold by private individuals and companies, based on availability and the public’s willingness to pay. Corporations tend to value profits over service. Obviously, we can’t live without water. We’d be at the mercy of the people in control.

T. Boone Pickens isn’t the only one grabbing up water rights. In fact, most of the companies that are buying land with access to aquifers are foreign. Major players here and abroad include Viviendi, Perrier, Suez, Bechtel and Monsanto. Right now, only 5 percent of the water supply is in corporate hands, but that could change at any time, especially as the World Bank and other organizations push for privatization.

The only obstacle that remains in Pickens’ and other investors’ path is finding buyers. Several water districts have already refused to sign up, mostly due to pressure from political and environmental groups campaigning against the privatization of water. The Sierra Club is one of them, and their efforts to educate the public in Texas might just pay off. Until the day that Texas gets so dry officials are desperate for water and willing to do just about anything to get it, that is. Then a ball may be set in motion that will change public water access as we know it. We can only hope that other solutions are put forth before that becomes a reality.

Link [Bloomberg News] + [USDA] + [Sierra Club]

Photo credit: Time Magazine + Sierra Club

Next Page »