- Sustainability - list.sfgreens.org

[Sustain] Time Sensitive! Tue - Res. To Oppose PG&E Liquid Natural Gas Pipeline
by Eric Brooks 24 Jul '09

24 Jul '09

Hi all, Supervisor Chris Daly has placed an item on the SF Board of Supervisors "Adoption Without Committee Reference" agenda for this Tuesday July 28 that will urge PG&E to withdraw from the 250 mile Oregon to California liquid natural gas pipeline project; called the Pacific Connector. Please take a moment to send comments from you and your organizations to urge the Board of Supervisors to support Daly's resolution. Since the item has not been sent to committee, you can also comment in person at the Board next Tuesday (SF City Hall, Room 250). Public comment usually starts between 2:45 and 3:30pm. Below is the hearing title of the measure. The resolution itself, including Pacific Environment's background report material is online at: http://our-city.org/resources/Resolution_Oppose_LNG_Pipeline.pdf 41. 090947 [Avoiding new foreign fossil fuel dependence in San Francisco's electricity supply] Supervisor Daly Resolution asking Pacific Gas & Electric Corporation to end partnership in the "Pacific Connector" pipeline. ### -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0

[Sustain] Fwd: Obama Appoints Pro Franken-Foods Michael Taylor Food Safety Czar
by Eric Brooks 23 Jul '09

23 Jul '09

*/ /* */ /**/Spilling the Beans/, July 22, 2009* ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Subscribe to e-newsletter <http://www.seedsofdeception.com/utility/showPage/index.cfm?objectID=gmfree,…> /Spilling the Beans /* ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *The following is also available on **_Jeffrey Smith’s Huffington Post blog_* <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/youre-appointing-who-plea_b_243…>*.* *You’re Appointing WHO? Please Obama, say it’s not so!* The person who may be responsible for more food-related illness and death than anyone in history has just been made the US food safety czar. This is no joke. Here’s the back story. When FDA scientists were asked to weigh in on what was to become the most radical and potentially dangerous change in our food supply—the introduction of genetically modified (GM) foods—_secret documents_ <http://biointegrity.org/list.html> now reveal that the experts were VERY concerned. Memo after memo described toxins, new diseases, nutritional deficiencies, and hard-to-detect allergens. They were adamant that the technology carried “Serious health hazards,” and required careful, long-term research, including human studies, before any genetically modified organisms (GMOs) could be safely released into the food supply. But the biotech industry had rigged the game so that neither science nor scientists would stand in their way. They had placed their own man in charge of FDA policy and he wasn’t going to be swayed by feeble arguments related to food safety. No, he was going to do what corporations had done for decades to get past these types of pesky concerns. He was going to lie. *Dangerous Food Safety Lies* When the FDA was constructing their GMO policy in 1991-2, their scientists were clear that gene-sliced foods were significantly different and could lead to “_different risks_ <http://biointegrity.org/FDAdocs/01/view2.html>” than conventional foods. But _official policy_ <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-smith/obamas-team-includes-dang_b_147…> declared the opposite, claiming that the FDA knew /nothing/ of significant differences, and declared GMOs substantially equivalent. This fiction became the rationale for allowing GM foods on the market /without any required safety studies /whatsoever! The determination of whether GM foods were safe to eat was placed entirely in the hands of the companies that made them—companies like Monsanto, which told us that the PCBs, DDT, and Agent Orange were safe. GMOs were rushed onto our plates in 1996. Over the next nine years, _multiple chronic illnesses_ <http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE5050S920090106?sp=true%2…> in the US nearly doubled—from 7% to 13%. _Allergy-related emergency room visits_ <http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/ed584ff1c2e1162a852575fc00536790…> doubled between 1997 and 2002 while food allergies, especially among children, skyrocketed. We also witnessed a dramatic rise in asthma, autism, obesity, diabetes, digestive disorders, and certain cancers. In January of this year, Dr. P. M. Bhargava, one of the world’s top biologists, told me that after reviewing 600 scientific journals, he concluded that the GM foods in the US are largely responsible for the increase in many serious diseases. In May, the _American Academy of Environmental Medicine_ <http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html> concluded that animal studies have demonstrated a _causal relationship_ <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?objectID=2989> between GM foods and infertility, accelerated aging, dysfunctional insulin regulation, changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system, and immune problems such as asthma, allergies, and inflammation In July, a _report_ <http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0438.htm> by eight international experts determined that the flimsy and superficial evaluations of GMOs by both regulators and GM companies “_systematically overlook the side effects_ <http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/11303-re-study-criticise…>” and significantly underestimate “the initial signs of diseases like cancer and diseases of the hormonal, immune, nervous and reproductive systems, among others.” *The Fox Guarding the Chickens* If GMOs are indeed responsible for massive sickness and death, then the individual who oversaw the FDA policy that facilitated their introduction holds a uniquely infamous role in human history. That person is Michael Taylor. He had been Monsanto’s attorney before becoming policy chief at the FDA. Soon after, he became Monsanto’s Vice President and chief lobbyist. *This month Michael Taylor became the senior advisor to the commissioner of the FDA. He is now America’s food safety czar. What have we done?* *The Milk Man Cometh* While Taylor was at the FDA in the early 90’s, he also oversaw the policy regarding Monsanto’s genetically engineered _bovine growth hormone_ <http://yourmilkondrugs.com/> (rbGH/rbST)—injected into cows to increase milk supply. The milk from injected cows has more pus, more antibiotics, more bovine growth hormone, and most importantly, more insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1). IGF-1 is a huge risk factor for common cancers and its high levels in this drugged milk is why so many _medical organizations_ <http://action.psr.org/site/PageServer?pagename=Oregon_rBGHFactSheetsandDown…> and _hospitals_ <http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:063SblHxCSUJ:www.themilkweed.com/F…> have taken stands against rbGH. A former Monsanto scientist told me that when three of his Monsanto colleagues evaluated rbGH safety and discovered the elevated IGF-1 levels, even they refused to drink any more milk—unless it was organic and therefore untreated. Government scientists from Canada _evaluated_ <http://www.nfu.ca/gapsreport.html> the FDA’s approval of rbGH and concluded that it was a dangerous facade. The drug was banned in Canada, as well as Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. But it was approved in the US while Michael Taylor was in charge. His drugged milk might have caused a significant rise in US cancer rates. Additional _published evidence_ <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/30/health/30twin.html> also implicates rbGH in the high rate of fraternal twins in the US. Taylor also determined that milk from injected cows did not require any special labeling. And as a gift to his future employer Monsanto, he wrote a white paper suggesting that if companies ever had the audacity to label their products as /not/ using rbGH, they should also include a disclaimer stating that according to the FDA, there is no difference between milk from treated and untreated cows. Taylor’s disclaimer was also a lie. Monsanto’s own studies and FDA scientists officially acknowledged differences in the drugged milk. No matter. Monsanto used Taylor’s white paper as the basis to successfully sue dairies that labeled their products as rbGH-free. *Will Monsanto’s Wolff Also Guard the Chickens?* As consumers learned that rbGH was dangerous, they refused to buy the milk. To keep their customers, a tidal wave of companies has publicly committed to not use the drug and to label their products as such. Monsanto tried unsuccessfully to convince the FDA and FTC to make it illegal for dairies to make rbGH-free claims, so they went to their special friend in Pennsylvania—Dennis Wolff. As state Secretary of Agriculture, Wolff unilaterally declared that labeling products rbGH-free was illegal, and that all such labels must be removed from shelves statewide. This would, of course, eliminate the label from all national brands, as they couldn’t afford to create separate packaging for just one state. Fortunately, consumer demand forced Pennsylvania’s Governor Ed Rendell to step in and stop Wolff’s madness. But Rendell allowed Wolff to take a compromised position that now requires rbGH-free claims to also be accompanied by Taylor’s FDA disclaimer on the package. President Obama is considering Dennis Wolff for the top food safety post at the USDA. Yikes! _Rumor_ <http://www.grist.org/article/usda-may-get-dennis-wolff-for-food-safety-post…> has it that the reason why Pennsylvania’s governor is supporting Wolff’s appointment is to get him out of the state—after he “screwed up so badly” with the rbGH decision. Oh great, governor. Thanks. *Ohio Governor Gets Taylor-itus* Ohio not only followed Pennsylvania’s lead by requiring Taylor’s FDA disclaimer on packaging, they went a step further. They declared that dairies must place that disclaimer on the same panel where rbGH-free claims are made, and even dictated the font size. This would force national brands to re-design their labels and may ultimately dissuade them from making rbGH-free claims at all. The Organic Trade Association and the International Dairy Foods Association filed a lawsuit against Ohio. Although they lost the first court battle, upon appeal, the judge ordered a mediation session that takes place today (July 23, 2009). Thousands of Ohio citizens have flooded Governor Strickland’s office with urgent requests to withdraw the states anti-consumer labeling requirements. Perhaps the governor has an ulterior motive for pushing his new rules. If he goes ahead with his labeling plans, he might end up with a top appointment in the Obama administration. To hear what America is saying about GMOs and to add your voice, go to our _new Facebook group_ <http://www.facebook.com/groups/edit.php?gid=121443803326>. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ © copyright Institute For Responsible Technology 2009. Jeffrey M. Smith is the author of publication /Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods/, which presents 65 risks in easy-to-read two-page spreads. His first book, /Seeds of Deception/, is the top rated and #1 selling book on GM foods in the world. He is the Executive Director of the Institute for Responsible Technology www.responsibletechnology.org <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/>, which is spearheading the Campaign for Healthier Eating in America. Go to www.responsibletechnology.org <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/> to learn more about how to avoid GM foods. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ */Spilling the Beans/* is a monthly column available at www.responsibletechnology.org <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/>. The website also offers eater-friendly tips for avoiding GMOs at home and in restaurants. Permission is granted to publishers and webmasters to reproduce issues of Spilling the Beans in whole or in part. Just email us at column(a)seedsofdeception.com <mailto:column@seedsofdeception.com> to let us know who you are and what your circulation is, so we can keep track. The Institute for Responsible Technology is working to end the genetic engineering of our food supply and the outdoor release of GM crops. We warmly welcome your donations and support. Go to www.responsibletechnology.org <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/> or click here <http://www.responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?objectID=171> if you'd like to make a tax-deductible donation. Click here <http://www.tccouncil.org/institute_membership> if you would like to become a member of the Institute. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ */ [Write a comment on this email] /_ Send this Email to a Friend <http://www.seedsofdeception.com/includes/showObject.cfm?sendArticle=1&indep…>_* *Write a Comment on This Email* <http://www.seedsofdeception.com/includes/showObject.cfm?independentPage=wri…> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This email was sent to brookse(a)igc.org, by The Institute for Responsible Technology <http://www.seedsofdeception.com/>, located at PO Box 469 - - Fairfield, IA 52556 - United States of America. * To unsubscribe~from this publication or remove~your email~address from all lists maintained by The Institute for Responsible Technology, please visit: Unsubscribe <http://www.seedsofdeception.com/email/unsubscribe.cfm?u=brookse@igc.org> * To update your contact information: Update Profile / Email Address <http://www.seedsofdeception.com/email/subscribe.cfm?ci=brookse@igc.org> * Read our Privacy Policy: Privacy Policy <http://www.seedsofdeception.com/help.cfm?happ=SiteAdministrator&topicID=645> Powered by */FullPartner/* <http://www.fullpartner.com/fullpartner/Public/GettingStarted/index.cfm?af=i…>

1 0

[Sustain] Don't let the nuclear power industry hijack the climate bill!
by Don Eichelberger 23 Jul '09

23 Jul '09

It seems it will never die, this poisonous and expensive industry. Nuclear power once again offers itself as a solution to global warming, and wants billions of our dollars to help realize a goal of 100 nuclear reactors in the country to combat GW. Fortunately, NIRS has made it easy to respond by clicking a mouse. I know there is a lot of good work going on by many of you getting this, perhaps not for the first time; educating the public, testifying at committee meetings, writing letters to editors (those that are left), serving on committees, volunteering, blogging, twittering, whatever you do to add to the voice. If you haven't done it, yet, this is an easy one. If you want to do more, I hope you are identifying local, community organizations, in addition to the good national ones, like NIRS doing good work who could use your volunteer or financial support. For information on groups, issues, news and anything energy and nuclear, go to the Abalone Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse website at http://www.energy-net.org/ Meanwhile, please join me in stopping the nuclear power industry's hijack of the Senate climate bill, seeking tens of billions of taxpayer-backed loan guarantees to build new nuclear reactors across the country. I just wrote my Senators and you can help stop these dangerous proposals by writing your Senators too right here: http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5502/t/5846/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=1… Thank you, Don

1 0

[Sustain] Piratecatradio and Bohemian Grove
by Don Eichelberger 22 Jul '09

22 Jul '09

You can hear my latest contribution to piratecatradio.com from this last Friday. Download the pod cast at www.piratecatradio.com/Diamond-Dave 20090717.mp3 and I am about 1hr. 35 min. in. There is some discussion of the Bohemian Grove, and then a song. I will also be on next Friday, 7/24, between 4-6 PM for a more detailed discussion of the Bohemian Grove and why we have protested there off and on for 30 years. A newly constituted Students for a Democratic Society will also be on to discuss their event planned at the Grove for the next day, July 25th. Listen live, or download the pod cast from www.piratecatradio.com/Diamond-Dave 20090724.mp3 soon after the show and for six weeks afterward. Don

1 0

[Sustain] Greens Give a Thumbs Down to House Energy Bill
by Martin Zehr 17 Jul '09

17 Jul '09

Press Release Home | Press | Print Back Greens give a thumbs-down to the House energy bill, urge Obama and the Senate to pass stronger anti-global warming legislation GREEN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES http://www.gp.org For Immediate Release: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 Contacts: Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, cell 202-904-7614, mclarty(a)greens.org Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene(a)gp.org Green Party 2009 Annual National Meeting in Durham, NC, July 23-26: http://www.ncgreenparty.org/2009-ANM.html Media credentialing page for the meeting: http://www.gp.org/forms/media WASHINGTON, DC -- The Green Party's national Eco-Action Committee is sharply criticizing an energy bill passed in the US House (HR 2454), calling the legislation dangerously inadequate and a concession to polluting industries. Greens, currently preparing for the party's 2009 annual national meeting in Durham, North Carolina, are urging the US Senate and President Obama to reject the bill and instead enact stronger policies to curb global warming. The meeting takes place from July 23 to 26 (http://www.ncgreenparty.org/2009-ANM.html) "The Energy Bill passed by the US House of Representatives is not a transition to a sustainable energy future," said Audrey Clement, a Virginia Green and member of the Eco-Action Committee. "It moves us in the wrong direction by subsidizing more coal and nuclear power, and it''s far too weak in its support of earth-gentle renewable energies and in its effort to reduce carbon emissions." Greens called the the bill's cap on greenhouse gas emissions a fraction of what it should be and said that the cap is undermined by the allowance of annual "offsets" that allow polluters to keep polluting. "These offsets are a handout to large corporations," said Ms. Clement. The Environmental Protection Agency's projections show that the legislation's cap-and-trade system and provisions that restrict legal efforts to block coal projects will lead to more coal use in 2020 than in 2005. The EPA anticipates that conventional coal use will fall quickly after 2020, based on an expectation of new nuclear power plants coming on line. Greens strongly oppose more nuclear power plants and call "clean coal" an industry myth, noting the catastrophic devastation that coal mining has caused in West Virginia and other states through mountaintop removal. The Green Party supports a gradual elimination of coal and nuclear energy and a moratorium on the construction of new nuclear and coal plants. "The destructive effects of using coal and nuclear are enormous and well known," said Derek Iversen of the Green Party of California. "It's imperative that we phase out these industries as soon as possible, yet this bill does exactly the opposite." Greens said that the Renewable Energy Standard (RES) in the bill will have little effect, since it sets a goal of only 15% by 2020, and warned that the bill promotes trash incinerators and biomass burners despite the considerable greenhouse gases they emit. The Green Party calls for aggressive policies to develop alternative energies such as wind, solar, and geothermal, with an emphasis on bioregional self-sufficiency. "Nuclear and coal power as well as bio-fuels that appropriate needed agricultural land, hike food prices, draw down critical water tables, and degrade soils should be no part of the solution," said Gini Lester, a member of the Illinois Green Party. "We need to move away from corporate business-as-usual and get serious about real energy transformation." "We can achieve energy independence and more effectively address climate change through the strategic use of alternative energies such as wind and solar, and through increased efficiency and conservation," said Wes Rolley, co-chair of the Eco-Action Committee. "There can be no single solution that solves all of our problems; rather, there will be a host of smaller solutions, rooftop solar, in-stream hydro, etc. The key is to make them all work together." MORE INFORMATION Green Party of the United States http://www.gp.org 202-319-7191, 866-41GREEN Green candidate database and campaign information: http://www.gp.org/elections.shtml Green Party News Center http://www.gp.org/newscenter.shtml Green Party Speakers Bureau http://www.gp.org/speakers Green Party ballot access page http://www.gp.org/2008-elections International Committee of the Green Party: http://www.gp.org/committees/intl Green Pages, Vol. 13, No. 1 The official publication of record of the Green Party of the United States http://gp.org/greenpages-blog ~ END ~ search: lwcj, spol ___ Disclaimer: State, local, and candidate press releases made available here represent the opinions of the original source only. Opinions expressed by a state party or candidate do not necessarily represent the views of the Green Party of the United States. State party contact information, when provided with candidate releases, does not imply state party endorsement of the opinions expressed nor of the candidate (prior to gaining formal nomination by the party). ___ Office: PO Box 57065 Washington, D.C. 20037 Email: GPHQ--at--gp.org 202-319-7191 or toll-free (US): 866-41GREEN

1 0

[Sustain] Urgent Action: Stop Nukes In Senate Climate Bill
by Eric Brooks 17 Jul '09

17 Jul '09

*Nuclear Information and Resource Service* <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=jfAv9IZroBPsJwQ3DHBUO…> *ACT NOW!** TELL YOUR SENATORS: NO NUKES IN CLIMATE BILL, NO CLIMATE BILL WITH NUKES* July 16, 2009 Dear Friends, The Senate Environment Committee is delaying work on its climate bill until September. But there is plenty going on now--both publicly and behind-the-scenes. And the news isn't good. Some Republicans are pushing for their own climate and energy plan. It calls for $50 billion more in taxpayer loan guarantees for new reactor construction; a doubling of taxpayer spending on dangerous reprocessing technologies, and a formal Congressional intent to build 100 new reactors in the next 20 years! This would make the bailout of the auto industry seem like penny-ante poker. Indeed, a recent study by an economic analyst at the University of Vermont <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=ZWzpBYkD%2B%2FARQNP7O…> /finds that building 100 new reactors would cost from $1.9 to $4.1 trillion more than getting our electricity from clean renewable energy sources/. The Republican plan won't pass; yet too many Democrats seem willing to compromise on nuclear power in order to get a climate bill passed. *We need to act now, while decisions are being made in private. Please write your Senators here <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=5T2ZlU%2B5ufpJtOIf%2B…>*, and tell them that a climate bill that provides taxpayer subsidies to nuclear power would not only be ineffective at reducing carbon emissions, it would be unacceptable. *But that's not going to be enough.* We all need to ramp up our outreach, get the word to all of our mailing lists, e-mail lists, blogs, social networking sites, radio talk shows, letters-to-the-editor and so forth. *Please do everything you can to spread the news* that the Senate climate bill is in danger of being hijacked by the nuclear power industry. *And please support our campaign with your most generous donation so we can do the kind of outreach and mobilization needed. * <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=goSFUIW8gqABRSSjx%2BQ…> We've won twice this year already--defeating efforts to give the nuclear industry another $50 billion in loan guarantees. But this is going to be our biggest challenge yet. Many of those supporting nuclear expansion say they won't support any kind of climate bill anyway! So why should those in favor of taking necessary steps to reduce carbon emissions even think of compromising on nuclear power? *They shouldn't, and if they hear from enough of us, they won't*. But they have to hear from every one of us--and then a lot more. Don't forget that the Senate energy bill--which is slated to be folded in to the climate bill this Fall--sets up a new "Clean Energy Development Administration (CEDA)," with the power to give unlimited taxpayer loan guarantees for new reactors. That bill was sponsored by Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)--and it's just as unacceptable as the Republican plan. This provision, along with reprocessing funding, must not become part of the climate bill. Here is a link to a new fact sheet <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=%2FQCWaFEuAKiKcL95bE%…> from Physicians for Social Responsibility comparing the CEDA provisions in the Senate energy bill and the recently-passed House climate bill. We need to build our strength and show our strength, now and throughout the summer and fall. **The first step is to write your Senators here. <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=9ykLcCs0zPDLQGaJOqN%2…>* **The next step is to support us financially if at all possible <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=FwPEFZUqp%2BwX2fNZX5%…>.* **The third step is--if you haven't already--send a letter to President Obama* urging him to stand firm against Senate efforts to spend taxpayer money on nuclear power. You can do so here <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=ZgEUoORDgY3i4gz4AeMZM…>. **Next, if you haven't yet signed the Simple Statement on Nuclear Power and Climate, do so here <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=s2MCgby9P4u18wh%2B2gr…>*. If your friends haven't signed, ask them to. More than 10,000 people already have signed--but it will be a lot more effective if we can greatly increase that number! **Now, forward this alert to everyone and anyone who might be interested*. With all of us working and mobilizing together, we can stop this nuclear nonsense and begin building an energy policy for our future, one that is nuclear-free and carbon-free. Our lives, our children and our planet are at stake. Here's one more quick link <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=lyQprHaCmb1Qsd9lrmRau…>: to a /Science Daily/ article about a new Swedish study that finds nuclear power's contribution to global warming has been signficantly underestimated--not because of nuclear's carbon emissions, but because of its heat emissions. *There is really no choice: we can have nuclear power, or we can fight climate change. We can't do both. So we must act now*. We will keep you informed throughout the summer and fall about developments on the climate bill and proposals for new nuclear subsidies. Watch for our blogs on DailyKos and other sites. We'll send new Alerts when you can take new, effective action. We'll also be doing sample letters-to-the-editor, talking points for the next national call-in day, and more. But please feel free to contact us any time if you'd like more information. You can e-mail us at nirsnet(a)nirs.org <mailto:nirsnet@nirs.org>, or call us at 301-270-6477. 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=wpCsyKZE3pT%2Fm85Qi4J…> *P.S. We'll end on a very positive note!* Bonnie Raitt and Taj Mahal are teaming up for a nationwide tour this summer. $1 of every ticket sold will be donated to progressive organizations, including NIRS. You can find out more about the tour, and--importantly--*vote* for which category of organization should receive this money, by going here <http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=4d5RfpTTY8gV3R3BT7ZeK…>. ------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

[Sustain] Sustainability/Transpo Meeting Next Monday?
by Eric Brooks 13 Jul '09

13 Jul '09

Hi all, Next Monday is the third Monday of the month (the date we set for joint Sustainability/Transpo meetings). My schedule is open, so I'm ready to be there for a meeting. Attendance on Monday's has been pretty low though. Do y'all want to go for next Monday, or try a different day/time? peace Eric -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." – Che Guevara

1 0

[Sustain] 2008 Article: Connection Between Natural Gas & Israel Gaza Attacks
by Eric Brooks 13 Jul '09

13 Jul '09

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9245.shtml Gaza siege intensified after collapse of natural gas deal Mark Turner, The Electronic Intifada, 23 January 2008 (photo) Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and appointed Prime Minister Salam Fayyad attend a signing ceremony between OPIC (Overseas Private Investment Corporation) and the Palestinian Investment Fund in the West Bank city of Ramallah, July 2007. (Omar Rashidi/ MaanImages/POOL) Israel has dramatically intensified its military campaign in the Gaza Strip, stepping up air strikes and shelling of the beleaguered coastal strip. UN officials and human rights advocates warn that Gazans now face a humanitarian disaster of unprecedented magnitude with widespread disease and famine rapidly becoming reality as electricity generation, water supply, sewage treatment, food supplies and medical services grind to a halt as a consequence of the ever tighter Israeli blockade. Israel claims its recent moves are retaliation for continued rocket attacks originating in Gaza that despite their consistency cause scant damage and few actual casualties. But the reasons may include motivations with roots back in 2000, when the British firm British Gas Group (BG) discovered proven natural gas reserves of at least 1.3 trillion cubic feet beneath Gazan territorial waters worth nearly $4 billion.* The Palestinian Investment Fund (PIF), a financial holdings company owned primarily by independent Palestinian shareholders, is investing in the project and heads the negotiations in coordination with Mahmoud Abbas' government in the West Bank. BG won a majority stake in the concession to develop the Gaza Marine Field and originally targeted Egypt for the sale of the natural gas. But pressure from then-British Prime Minister Tony Blair led the company to redirect its efforts toward Israel and develop plans for an underwater pipeline that would transport the gas to an Israeli refinery at Ashkelon. That deal could have eventually provided Israel with approximately 10 percent of its annual energy requirement, and would have generated approximately $1 billion for the PIF. The Hamas election victory in 2006 put all that in jeopardy. The Palestine Investment Fund was set up by Salam Fayyad, a World Bank veteran lauded by the United States as a practical thinker and fiscal reformist who would deliver transparency to the Palestinian Authority's financial dealings. In 2003, then PA Finance Minister Fayyad consolidated a varied collection of Palestinian Authority holdings into the fund audited by Standard & Poor's and now valued at an estimated $1.3 billion. The fund's portfolio includes Palestine's most profitable company, Paltel, and serves as the primary vehicle for private investment in Palestinian sustainable infrastructure. The PIF is ostensibly overseen by the Palestinian Authority; revenue generated by the fund could potentially be available to a Hamas-led government. Through the deal structured with the PIF, BG owns 90 percent of the Gaza Marine license. Consolidated Contractors Company, a Palestinian owned construction firm, owns the remaining 10 percent. The Palestinian Authority retains an option to take a stake in the concession once production is sanctioned. After the 2006 Palestinian election results, Israel began stalling in its negotiations with BG. Any deal that could result in funds reaching Gaza would seriously undermine official Israeli policy toward Hamas. For its part, Hamas assured it would not interrupt development of the project, but reserved its right to restructure parts of the deal it deemed harmful to Palestinian interests. In an interview with Dow Jones Newswires, Minister of Economy Ziad al-Zaza reiterated Hamas opposition to any sale of fuel to Israel. After the Hamas election victory, Israel embarked on an intense campaign to eliminate the movement as a viable political entity in Gaza while at the same time attempting to rehabilitate the defeated Fatah as the dominant political player in the West Bank. By leveraging political tensions between the two parties, arming forces loyal to Abbas and the selective resumption of financial aid, Israel and the United States effectively re-installed Fatah in the West Bank, projected the party back onto the international stage and revived the possibility of concluding the energy deal. With Hamas isolated geographically in Gaza, Israeli policy focused on isolating it politically as well. Israel has made significant progress toward this goal. Fayyad was appointed Prime Minister of the new unelected West Bank government recognized by the West, and by April 2007 the Israeli Cabinet had reversed an earlier decision to prohibit the purchase of natural gas from the Palestinian Authority. But with 1.5 million people living in the Gaza Strip, Hamas retains significant influence in the Palestinian political arena. Israel will have to eliminate the party completely in order to create a political climate suited to accommodate the BG deal. Time is running out. In January, BG announced it was pulling the plug on negotiations with Israel due to the long impasse, and was again considering Egypt as a buyer. The Egyptian option includes liquefying up to a third of the gas for export to the US and Europe. BG announced plans to close its office near Tel Aviv at the end of January and sell its share in Israel's offshore Med Yavne natural gas field. Since the announcement, Israel has radically expanded its sanctions, cut fuel shipments entirely and stepped up its military campaign. Increased air strikes and use of internationally proscribed tank shell ammunition has led to a drastic increase in civilian deaths and injuries in hopes of eroding support for Hamas in Gaza. Combined with dangerous shortages of food, water and basic supplies, the coastal region has fallen into catastrophe. Israel and the United States refuse to acknowledge the growing chorus of international condemnation. Appeals from Ramallah lack the popular mobilization needed to effectively advocate an end to the Israeli siege. Regardless of the future of the Gaza Marine Field, Gazans can be sure they will be denied any relief it might once have afforded them. * Editor's note: This article originally stated the natural gas reserve has 1.3 trillion cubic meters rather than feet. The Electronic Intifada regrets the error. International human rights activist Mark Turner recently returned from a nine-month stay in Balata Refugee Camp in the northern West Bank city of Nablus. Turner is currently touring the US, presenting his experiences and analysis of the developing situation in occupied Palestine and can be reached at Mark.Turner[(a)]ResearchJournalismInitiative.net. -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." – Che Guevara

1 0

[Sustain] Peak Oil Report presentation POSTPONED
by Eric Brooks 07 Jul '09

07 Jul '09

Jeanne <greengal(a)jmrcpa.com> wrote: The presentation of the Peak Oil report to the Board of Supes has been rescheduled to July 23. Sorry for the false start; the delay was not my choice. Jeanne previously Jeanne wrote: > > At long last, the presentation of the Peak Oil report is scheduled. > If you could forward it to any appropriate lists, I would appreciate it. > > The presentation is July 9 to the GAO committee of the Board of Supes, > 1:00 in Room 263. Many of our recommendations are the same as one > would do for climate change, but this gives us another argument for > change. To make an impression, we need members of the public to > support us. I encourage anyone who is interested (and available in > the middle of a work day) to come out. Jason Mark and I will be there > early. > > I attach the report. It's long, but the first 16 pages have a lot of > the best stuff. Plus the transpo chapter has some interesting data. > > Thanks for your help. > > Jeanne > > > PS My old email crashed; that's why I am not on the sustainability > list any more. This is my replacement email, if you would please put > me on the listserve.

1 0

[Sustain] Happy Planet Index
by David Fairley 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

An article on a different approach for valuing economies of countries around the world, called the Happy Planet Index that includes ecological footprint. Costa Rica is #1. US is #114 out of 143. Here's an article on it: Published on Sunday, July 5, 2009 by the Observer/UK Costa Rica is World's Greenest, Happiest Country Latin American nation tops index ranking countries by ecological footprint and happiness of their citizens by Ashley Seager http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/07/05-0 The original study is worth reading, and contains a plug for Green Parties: http://www.happyplanetindex.org/ David

1 0