May 2009 - Sustainability - list.sfgreens.org

[Sustain] Los Angeles Times Obama walks a fine line over mining Environmentalists feel betrayed by the EPA's decision not to block new mountaintop mining projects.
by Michael Boyd 31 May '09

31 May '09

Los Angeles Times Obama walks a fine line over mining Environmentalists feel betrayed by the EPA's decision not to block new mountaintop mining projects...Tom Hamburger and Peter Wallsten http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-mountaintop-mining31-2… Reporting from Washington — With the election of President Obama, environmentalists had expected to see the end of the "Appalachian apocalypse," their name for exposing coal deposits by blowing the tops off whole mountains. But in recent weeks, the administration has quietly made a decision to open the way for at least two dozen more mountaintop removals. In a letter this month to a coal ally, Rep. Nick J. Rahall II (D-W.Va.), the Environmental Protection Agency said it would not block dozens of "surface mining" projects. The list included some controversial mountaintop mines. The industry says the practice of using explosives to blast away a peak is safer and more efficient than traditional shaft mining. But critics say the process scars the landscape and dumps tons of waste -- some of it toxic -- into streams and valleys. The administration's decision is not the final word on the projects or the future of mountaintop removal. But the letter, coupled with the light it sheds on relations between the mining industry and the Obama White House, has disappointed environmentalists. Some say they feel betrayed by a president they thought would end or sharply limit the practice. The issue is politically sensitive because environmentalists were an active force behind Obama's election, and the president's standing is tenuous among Democratic voters in coal states. West Virginia, for example, voted for George W. Bush in the 2000 presidential election largely because Democrat Al Gore was critical of the coal industry. Moreover, Obama needs support from local lawmakers for an energy agenda that would further regulate home-state industries, but halting mountaintop mining could eliminate jobs and put upward pressure on energy prices in a time of economic hardship. Coal advocates have solicited help from officials as high up as White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. And the issue has sparked contentious debates within the administration, including one shouting match in which top officials from two government agencies were heard pounding their fists on the table, according to sources briefed on the meeting who requested anonymity when discussing White House dealings. The White House is "searching for a way to walk this tightrope," said Phil Smith, a spokesman for the United Mine Workers of America. "They have a large constituency of people who want to see an immediate end to mountaintop removal, and an equally large constituency . . . whose communities depend on those jobs." Shortly after his inauguration, Obama won praise from the green lobby for taking a skeptical view of the mining process. And in March the EPA announced it would review the mountaintop projects, breaking from the Bush administration's practice of granting permits with little or no scrutiny. The EPA has the authority to block mountaintop removal under the Clean Water Act. But if the agency raises no objections, the final decision on projects is made by the Army Corps of Engineers, which historically has approved mountaintop mining. The corps previously had indicated its intention to approve 48 pending permits. Although environmentalists had expected the new administration to put the brakes on mountaintop removal, Rahall and other mining advocates have pointed out that Obama did not promise to end the practice and was more open to it than his Republican opponent, Arizona Sen. John McCain. A review of Obama's campaign statements show that he had expressed concern about the practice without promising to end it. On a West Virginia visit, when asked about the impact of the mining on the state's streams, he said he wanted "strong enforcement of the Clean Water Act," adding: "I will make sure the head of the Environmental Protection Agency believes in the environment." And his EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, has said that the agency had "considerable concern regarding the environmental impact these projects would have on fragile habitats and streams." She pledged that the agency would "use the best science and follow the letter of the law in ensuring we are protecting our environment." Soon afterward, the agency in effect blocked six major pending mountaintop removal projects in West Virginia, Kentucky and Ohio. But this month, after a series of White House meetings with coal companies and advocates including Rahall and Democratic West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin III, the EPA released the little-noticed letter giving the green light to at least two dozen projects. "It was a big disappointment," said Joan Mulhern, a lawyer for Earthjustice, an environmental law firm that has led court challenges to mountaintop removal. "It's disturbing and surprising that this administration, headed by a president who has expressed concern about mountaintop removal, would let such a large number of permits go forward without explanation." Mulhern charged that the EPA "blew off" Jackson's earlier promises that the agency would adhere to science and would conduct an open process. Ed Hopkins, a top Sierra Club official, said some of the projects that have now obtained the EPA's blessing "are as large and potentially destructive as the ones they objected to." "It makes us wonder what standards -- if any -- the administration is using," Hopkins said. EPA and White House officials say that about 200 proposed mining projects are under review and that the administration already had taken steps to break from Bush-era policies. "We want to make informed decisions guided by science and the law, and a change in such a practice is not something that happens overnight," said Christine Glunz, a spokeswoman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality. But after the EPA's initial announcement in March that it would conduct aggressive reviews, Manchin and Rahall took the coal industry's concerns to White House officials, including Emanuel and Nancy Sutley, who heads the Council on Environmental Quality. Manchin said he told the White House that "we are looking for a balance between the environment and the economy, and they assured me that they will work with us to find that balance." Environmentalists were stunned to learn from Rahall's office May 15 that the EPA had given its blessing to 42 out of the 48 mine projects it had reviewed so far -- including two dozen mountaintop removals. The news came in a letter to Rahall from Michael Shapiro, the EPA's acting assistant administrator, who wrote, "I understand the importance of coal mining in Appalachia for jobs, the economy, and meeting the nation's energy needs.

1 0

[Sustain] Congressman Jerry McNerney has gone over to the dark side by supporting weapon design work at Livermore Lab
by Eric Brooks 30 May '09

30 May '09

All, It looks like Congressman Jerry McNerney has gone over to the dark side by supporting weapon design work at Livermore Labs. Any idea on who we might support as an alternative for his seat in Congress? Mike Boyd-CARE *Ignition facility finally a reality...Suzanne Bohan* http://www.contracostatimes.com/top-stories/ci_12480167 LIVERMORE — The director of Lawrence Livermore Laboratory struggled with tears for a moment as he thanked the legions of lab employees who helped build the National Ignition Facility, the 10-story tall building behind him. "I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart," said George Miller, a nuclear-weapons designer who assumed leadership of the lab in 2006. Miller addressed more than 3,000 invited guests and lab employees who had gathered for Friday's dedication ceremony for the facility, known as the NIF. The event took place 12 years to the day after the groundbreaking for what is now the largest laser facility in the world. The NIF is designed to achieve fusion ignition, a holy grail of physics that has been elusive thus far despite 60 years of worldwide efforts, and billions spent trying. The project, six years late and four times the original estimated cost, has been dogged by enormous challenges, from technical problems, to resistance or apathy in Congress, to skepticism in parts of the science community about whether fusion ignition can be achieved. Many times throughout the years, NIF's future was uncertain. The dedication also drew protesters. Members of Tri-Valley CAREs, a watchdog group that monitors lab activity, demonstrated outside the northwest corner of the lab. Banners hung on a fence expressed opposition to the facility, which the group asserts will be used for weapons design work, upping the ante in the arms race. The group displayed documents that it says back its case, but the lab insists NIF won't be used for that purpose. Still, the day belonged to the legions of NIF enthusiasts. Eleven speakers, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, shared their enthusiasm for the project, and their optimism that the facility would achieve fusion ignition. Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton, described his earlier work in the wind energy field and the colossal failures he witnessed. Then he pointed in the direction of wind farms in the nearby hills of Altamont Pass. "We persisted and made incremental improvements, and now wind energy is overlooking the distant and advanced cousin we see today," he said, referring to the massive green and yellow NIF building behind him. Like wind energy, McNerney was alluding that the fusion energy quest has endured one failure after another to achieve "ignition," in which more energy is released by a fusion reaction than is used to create it. In an ignition state, the reacting hydrogen is at least as hot as the sun. In addition to potentially providing a virtually limitless source of energy, creating such miniature suns on earth opens the door to studying the fundamental nature of the universe, as well as nuclear material, hence NIF's application in testing the safety and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile without underground testing. Every year during NIF's development, funding was in jeopardy, said three lawmakers who spoke at the event — Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Alamo; Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose; and Feinstein. Technical problems, skepticism over funding a long-shot success of fusion work, and competition for dollars from projects in every other state meant the annual request for funding to keep the project going was often in question, Tauscher said. Thomas D'Agostino, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, which oversees the lab's operations, provided assurances that annual funding for the NIF's research work would continue. "I plan to fully support this facility from an operational standpoint," D'Agostino said. The crowd sat under the midday sun in chairs spread out over a large lawn ringed by conifers. Many donned hats and kept cool using cardboard fans provided by the lab, though a cooling breeze occasionally provided relief. Lab officials opened the NIF to tours throughout the day, with technicians and scientists available to answer questions. A control room with seven consoles and five monitors serves as the "brain" of the facility, and was designed similar to NASA's control room in Houston. "I'm very, very excited," said Jeff Atherton, project director for target experimental systems, speaking of the fusion experiments that will start this summer. "We've been working a long time to get to this point." The eyes of NIF operations manager Bruno Vanwonterghem also lit up when describing the experiments that lie ahead. "NIF is really the place where 50 years of fusion development and 50 years of laser development come together," he said. ###

1 0

[Sustain] Fwd: ALERT! Leno's Bill Unfair Exchange in Bayview Hunters Point
by Eric Brooks 27 May '09

27 May '09

Hi all, See the urgent action request below from POWER and sign your groups onto the attached letter by tomorrow. Because the letter is totally consistent with our past decisions on Lennar and the Hunters Point Redevelopment deal, and because I have been interacting actively with the growing Stop Lennar campaign, I will go ahead and sign the SFGP onto the letter unless someone raises a concern before midnight. peace, Eric B alicia(a)peopleorganized.org wrote: Comrades, Mark Leno's SB 792 left the Appropriations Committee today to be voted on by the full Senate. While the timeline for the vote is still unclear, we still have a few POWERful days to register our opposition. Leno's bill would allow for the transfer of clean parkland at Candlestick Point to the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency for private development, and replace it with toxic land that is not an even exchange. As you may know, the Lennar Corporation, a developer that has endangered the community by exposing it to toxic dust from the Hunters Point Shipyard, is planning to build 10,000 luxury condominiums on the site as part of a brand new neighborhood they plan to build inside the boundaries of Bayview Hunters Point. Not only is this a prime example of environmental racism, it is also a marker of what is to come in the community if we don't make our voices heard TODAY. Here's the link to the bill: _http://www.totalcapitol.com/?bill_id=10961 _ *Bayview deserves better.* The Hunters Point Naval Shipyard is one of the worst Superfund sites in the country, and community residents are feeling the impacts. African American communities are disproportionately impacted by exposure to toxics, and Bayview Hunters Point is no different. More than 50% of community residents have some form of cancer or respiratory illness from living in proximity to a power plant, sewage treatment facility, a major freeway, and the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard. *SB 792 masks the reality that the Shipyard is not a park; it's a toxic Superfund site where radiation is still present. As a result, the exchange of the Shipyard for clean parkland in the community is is not an even exchange.* It's an insult to the Bayview Hunters Point community, and your voice is needed today! *Please take the attached letter, add your information, and send it back to us by THURSDAY, MAY 28, 2009. Include your zip code, and the full name of your organization (if applicable).* We want to gather 500 letters from San Franciscans and community based organizations everywhere who are concerned about the future of the Bayview Hunters Point community specifically, and African American communities and working class communities of color broadly. Forward to all of your networks! Alicia Schwartz Co-Director People Organized to Win Employment Rights (POWER) (415) 864-8372 ext. 305 -- *Please note our new addresses! * 335 South Van Ness, 2nd floor San Francisco, CA 94103 4923 3rd Street San Francisco, CA 94124 -- we are fighting for the noblest cause on earth, the liberation of mankind. they are fighting to entrench an outworn, anachronistic vile system of oppression. we represent progress: they represent decadence. we represent the fresh fragrance of flowers in bloom: they represent the rancid smell of decaying vegetation. we have the whole continent on our side. we have history on our side. we will win. robert mangaliso sobukwe, first president of the pan african congress

1 0

[Sustain] Board Pres Chiu Betrays Transit Promises Approves Oppressive Muni Budget
by Eric Brooks 27 May '09

27 May '09

Hi all, At around 12:50 pm today, during a special meeting of the Board of Supervisors which was held to decide whether to reject a draconian Muni budget that is balanced on the backs of the poor and environmentally conscious non-drivers; Board President David Chiu betrayed his own campaign promises, and Supervisor Sophie Maxwell yet again betrayed the many residents in her own district who depend on public services like mass transit for social equity. Both voted not to reject the Muni budget and to instead accept a transit budget which makes transit riders pay four times what car drivers will pay to supposedly stabilize our transportation funding in San Francisco. Please let supervisors Chiu and Maxwell know how displeased you are with their cowardly deferral to the Mayor's office and to higher income voters who do not want to accept environmentally crucial increased parking fees. David.Chiu(a)sfgov.org 415-554-7450 sophie.maxwell(a)sfgov.org 415-554-7670 See a copy of Supervisor Chiu's election flyer with its now broken campaign promises attached. peace Eric Brooks -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." – Che Guevara

1 0

[Sustain] Urgent: Act Tonight! Contact Senators Leno & Yee To Stop Bayview Toxic Trade
by Eric Brooks 25 May '09

25 May '09

Hi all, Tomorrow, Tuesday, May 26th, our State Senator Mark Leno is introducing a bill (SB 792) in the Senate Appropriations Committee which will trade crucial State Park and Public Trust lands in the Bayview Hunters Point for inferior and toxically polluted lands in the same district; all in order to pave the way for market rate condo and strip mall projects that will likely be built by the environmentally criminal Lennar Corporation. Please contact Appropriations Committee members Mark Leno and Leland Yee tonight to indicate your and your group's opposition to this toxic giveaway. Then forward this email to anyone you know who might take action. See the attached sample letter written by POWER to Senator Yee, for ideas on how to word your letter. Also contact Greenaction's Marie Harrison at marie(a)greenaction.org to let her know that she can represent your group tomorrow when she meets with Senators in Sacramento to oppose SB 792. (Note: I am sending Rich's letter from the SF Green Party tonight to both offices.) Here is rapid alert contact information for the two senators: *Senator Mark Leno:* *Fax: * *(916) 445-4722* *Email: senator.leno(a)senate.ca.gov **Phone: ** (916) 651-4003* * Senator Leland Yee: **Email: *senator.yee(a)senator.ca.gov *Phone: ** (916) 651-4008* peace Eric Brooks -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0

[Sustain] Fwd: Nuclear In Climate Bill & Sign Statement Opposed
by Eric Brooks 21 May '09

21 May '09

*Nuclear Information and Resource Service* <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=N1qNBk5d%2Fv8Xoc7wgra…> *MURKOWSKI, OTHER PRO-NUKE AMENDMENTS DEFEATED IN SENATE COMMITTEE* *REVISED CLEAN ENERGY BANK APPROVED IN HOUSE COMMITTEE* May 21, 2009 Dear Friends, *Thank you to each of the thousands of you who have written and called your elected officials over the past couple of weeks. You are making a difference!* Both the Senate Energy Committee, which is considering S. 949, the Senate energy bill, and the House Energy Committee, which is considering the Waxman-Markey climate change bill, are continuing to meet and mark up their respective legislation. But we thought we'd give you a quick update on how things are going. *First, the good news: *The Senate Energy Committee (very narrowly!) rejected Sen. Lisa Murkowski's (R-AK) amendment to support new nuclear reactors and radioactive waste reprocessing plants, and to provide bribes to local communities to accept "interim" storage of radioactive waste. The vote was 11-11, and Committee Chair Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) ruled it defeated. All Republicans on the committee plus Sen. Landrieu (D-LA) voted for the Murkowski amendment. All other Democrats except Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) (who voted present) voted against the amendment. The committee also voted down pro-reprocessing, pro-waste amendments from Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Jeff Sessions (R-AL), also by very narrow margins. We can expect to see some or all of these amendments again when the bill reaches the Senate floor. *Now, the less-good, but still not necessarily bad news:* the House Energy Committee voted 51-6 in support of a compromise clean energy bank amendment offered by Reps. John Dingell (D-MI), Jay Inslee (D-WA) and Bart Gordon (D-TN). While the "clean energy" bank remains self-defeating in that it continues to allow support for dirty nuclear power and coal technologies, many of the excesses in earlier versions of the legislation were addressed. For example, the version passed by the House Energy Committee does *NOT* allow unlimited loan guarantees to any technology. Instead, the amount of loan guarantees available would follow the current process, which requires annual Congressional authorization and appropriations. No single technology could receive more than 30% of the bank's overall funding. And priority is supposed to be given to those technologies that can provide the greatest greenhouse gas emission reductions within a reasonable period of time per dollar invested as well as the earliest reductions in greenhouse emissions. All of these are improvements from the clean energy bank included in the Senate energy bill, which continues to have unlimited loan guarantees, does not limit the amount a single technology could receive, and does not provide any priority in terms of efficiency or speed of reducing carbon emissions. We will soon post on NIRS website a more complete comparison of the two clean energy bank approaches. Amendments to the Waxman-Markey climate bill are continuing in the House Energy Committee (the Republicans had prepared 450 amendments--most of which they know will be defeated and some of which are downright silly)--in an effort to delay the bill's passage out of the Committee. We will let you know if any significant amendments that affect nuclear issues are adopted. It is likely that, as in the Senate, pro-nuclear amendments will be offered when the bill reaches the House floor. We will all need to be prepared to act accordingly. We will keep you posted on developments as they occur; let you know when the bills are ready for consideration on the Senate and House floors; and when you can effectively take more action to stop taxpayer support for nuclear power and to promote clean, safe, and cost-effective renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies. In the meantime, it is always helpful to keep your elected officials aware of your positions, and to keep organizing and reaching out to everyone around you. If you know people who want to be kept informed, please encourage them to join our e-mail Alert list by sending their name, city and state to nirsnet(a)nirs.org <mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org>. And if you haven't yet signed the simple statement on nuclear power and climate, please do so on the front page of our website: www.nirs.org <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=NGdzb81rDbKg3YAz2Q0sM…>. Thanks for all you do, Michael Mariotte Executive Director Nuclear Information and Resource Service nirsnet(a)nirs.org <mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org> www.nirs.org <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=7jxsdL0MMFgqTC%2FApls…> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ You have received this email through your subscription to this campaign's email list. If you did not subscribe, or would no longer like to receive email updates unsubscribe here <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=OAMNiE%2BsIOz7%2BLL%2…>.

1 0

[Sustain] Reminder: Joint Meeting: Transportation & Sustainability Working Groups, Today, May 18, 6:30-9pm, SFGP Office
by Eric Brooks 18 May '09

18 May '09

Joint Meeting: Transportation & Sustainability Working Groups When: Monday, 5/18/09, 6:30PM-9:00PM Where: SFGP Office, 1028A Howard St Proposed Agenda Items - Transit Budget - Elected MTA Board - Closing Last SF Power Plant / New 100% Clean Energy Act - Update On Privatized Sunset Solar Installation - Update On Community Choice Energy project (now Clean Power SF)

1 0

[Sustain] Call SF City Hall To Save Mass Transit!
by Eric Brooks 18 May '09

18 May '09

(Please forward this message widely to all San Franciscans you know who care about creating a better future through improved mass transit.) PHONE-IN DAY ALERT Save San Francisco Mass Transit! Call Supervisor Sophie Maxwell now! Earlier this month the Municipal Transportation Authority (MTA) proposed a budget which drastically raises Muni fares while heavily cutting service. As a result, San Franciscans riding Muni will shoulder a burden that is 4 times higher than all parking and enforcement fee increases in the same proposed budget. Meanwhile, the MTA coffers have been bilked by over $60 million in service order charges from other City departments, to pay for work that those departments should be doing anyway without charging the MTA anything! Those funds could go to creating a world class transit system if the Board of Supervisors votes to reject the budget and demand accountability. Tomorrow, Tuesday May 19, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors will vote on whether to reject this deeply flawed MTA budget. Supervisor Sophie Maxwell has been identified as the key swing vote on this issue and needs to hear from you! WHAT YOU CAN DO: Call Supervisor Sophie Maxwell today at: 415-554-7670 with the following message: "Please reject the MTA budget until it recovers enough service order funds and parking fees to get rid of all Muni fare increases and service cuts." (If you get a recording, or you are calling after business hours, just leave your comment as a voice mail message.) THEN: SHOW UP AT TODAY'S TRANSIT JUSTICE RALLY, TO DEMAND A BETTER MUNI BUDGET! Monday, May 18, 3pm, SF City Hall, Polk Street Steps DIRECTIONS: To get to the rally, go to the San Francisco Civic Center transit station at 8th and Market Streets and cross United Nations Plaza to City Hall (on Polk Street between Grove and McAllister). Thanks as always for your action and support. peace Eric Brooks Campaign Coordinator Our City -- This alert sent by: Our City 1028-A Howard Street San Francisco, CA 94103 415-756-8844 For more information about Our City campaigns go to: http://www.our-city.org info(a)our-city.org

1 0

[Sustain] [Fwd: Stop the "clean energy" bank--this is it folks!]
by Don Eichelberger 14 May '09

14 May '09

Folks- Here is an important alert from Nuclear Information Resource Service about efforts to give massive subsidies to "clean energy" efforts like nuclear and "clean coal". Please contact your legislator and Nancy Pelosi to remove taxpayer subsidies from these dirty and dangerous industries and characterizing them as "clean energy". Links below are easy to follow, and it wouldn't hurt to send a hand written letter or card in follow-up. Thank you, Don *Nuclear Information and Resource Service* <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=oLRzNgExNnnhNOrZCcMiq…> *THIS IS IT FOLKS! * *EITHER WE STOP THE "CLEAN ENERGY" BANK OR WE GET DOZENS OF NEW NUCLEAR REACTORS * *WE CAN WIN THIS ONE: ACT NOW!* May 14, 2009 Dear friends, We've asked a lot of you this past several months. As the Obama administration has moved into power, the pace of activity has increased; we know that. So we don't waste your time asking you to take actions that aren't meaningful. *And right now, we're asking you to take the most important action of the year.* Write your House member and Speaker Nancy Pelosi now. And then forward this message to everyone you can think of. *Write your House member here. <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=4cC4W0oZTXIEmQkIbDXs2…> * *Write Speaker Nancy Pelosi here.* <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=VamzII7DFTtLe7T5d71E5…> We should have figured it out earlier, but we didn't. The section in the bill was so obscure we all missed it. But the "Clean Energy Bank" legislation sponsored by Senate Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman and Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA) includes *UNLIMITED* taxpayer loan guarantees for construction of new nuclear reactors. Not $50 Billion, or $100 Billion. *UNLIMITED!* In other words, under the guise of a clean energy program, the nuclear power industry could get taxpayer money to build as many reactors as they wanted, regardless of their cost, regardless of their projected default rate. That's just unacceptable. We need to act on this as loudly and clearly as possible. Write your House member and Speaker Nancy Pelosi now. And then forward this message to everyone you can think of. *Write your House member here <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=EP4IvXE9s28kMI%2Fqen4…>. * *Write Speaker Nancy Pelosi here.* <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=oXX8ZGUI4ZSILmV7Uo4VW…> PLEASE forward this Alert to everyone you can think of. In 24 hours, we generated more than 3,000 letters in opposition to the pro-nuclear Murkowski amendment to the Senate energy bill. That's pretty good for one day, and we thank everyone who wrote (the Murkowski amendment has not yet been considered, it will likely come up next week). But we need to generate at least 10,000 letters to Pelosi and House members to stop this fake "clean energy" bank. Please help everyone you can think of to send letters now by forwarding this Alert. Phone calls to House members would be very effective too: 202-224-3121. *A NIRS blog posting on the "clean energy" bank is available here <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=jZC9IN8XBW3QolFeFjHEj…>.* It provides a lot more background info on this issue. You have our permission to re-post this everywhere and anywhere you want. Please do so. *This really is it folks.* The effectiveness of our actions now will determine our energy--and quite possibly our economic--future. There is just no reason for inaction; let's all do everything we can. *Pass the word; send an e-mail to your friends, forward this Alert everywhere. Put in on Facebook and MySpace. Twitter it. Blog it. Print this and take it to meetings. Do whatever you can. We can't let this stand.* And please send a few dollars our way. Every tax-deductible contribution you make enables us to reach more people, to expand our efforts, to build on what you already are doing. *We simply can't do this without your support, so please contribute here.* <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=HB6rkuBaCj9M51fWYfw5M…> *We need thousands and thousands of people responding to this Alert; please act, please do everything you can to expand our reach.* Thanks for all you do, Michael Mariotte Executive Director Nuclear Information and Resource Service nirsnet(a)nirs.org <mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org> www.nirs.org <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=dUGvOlm0BI79FLquLndKv…> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ You have received this email through your subscription to this campaign's email list. If you did not subscribe, or would no longer like to receive email updates unsubscribe here <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=X4gABCVUOirc%2FD57oX0…>.

1 0

[Sustain] SF Clean Energy Act Finally In Committee! Comment Today!
by Eric Brooks 11 May '09

11 May '09

Hi all, Sophie Maxwell's version (first attached document) of the Clean Energy Act (Prop H) is in the Land Use Committee, today, May 11, for discussion; in City Hall, Room 263, 1pm - hearing details at http://www.sfgov.org/site/bdsupvrs_page.asp?id=103771 Please send comments to Maxwell and her aide Jon Lau, at sophie.maxwell(a)sfgov.org and Jon.Lau(a)sfgov.org - that you want her office to meet with us as authors and organizers of the original Prop H to strengthen and pass her legislation. At a groundbreaking stakeholder meeting last week, SFPUC staff told various organizers working to ban fossil power plants in San Francisco, that the last operating fossil plant in the city, (Potrero-Mirant) can be replaced by 2010 with only 25 megawatts of alternative energy strategies! Maxwell's introduction of this legislation is our opportunity to take this SFPUC report and turn it into a legal mandate for 100% clean electricity in San Francisco. But this won't happen unless all of us contact Maxwell's office and insist on being included in the legislative process. The legislation has lots of flaws that need to be fixed before it will be strong enough to make clean energy happen in San Francisco; so please make your comments specific as to how you want to see the measure drafted. For some basic ideas of needed changes, see these, my recent comments to Maxwell's office - Here are proposed amendments to make the measure a lot stronger and more mandatory in nature. (With the current alarming acceleration of the climate crisis we now need mandates.) 1) Make the language very directive of the SFPUC, as Prop H was, and also include a directive to the SFPUC to deliver a full plan to Cal ISO to replace Mirant by 2010 with only renewables and efficiency 2) Correct the clean energy targets to make them mandates, including the 100% by 2040 mandate (include ability of Board to amend as in Prop H) 3) Use the definition of clean technology that is in the City's current Clean Tech ordinance (also attached) 4) Correct the language so that the plan is comprehensively developed for all current customers -and- future Community Choice(CCA) customers including detailed coordination with the projected CCA roll out (this would broaden the measure to cover all electricity customers in San Francisco) 5) Strengthen the public power study language so that it matches Prop H 6) Direct the SFPUC to develop a plan to sell the Combustion Turbines (Peakers) to a community that will use them to replace coal generation and petition the Dept. of Water Resources for authority to make the sale 7) Provide funding and direction to the LAFCo (Local Agency Formation Commission) to take over the process if the SFPUC doesn't complete the overall energy plan, and the Mirant replacement plan, on strict fixed schedules 8) Add specific language and funding for local green jobs development and pursuit of stimulus dollars 9) Remove the language "and to offset greenhouse gas emissions from other sectors" from the measure. 10) Add a clause directing the SFPUC to work with new city projects like the Mission Bay campus and Transbay Terminal to develop clean replacements for their natural gas power and steam plants. cheers Eric Brooks

2 3