- Sustainability - list.sfgreens.org

Re: [Sustain] [Transpo] Joint Sustain/Transpo Meeting On Wed or Thu the 23rd or 24th?
by Eric Brooks 18 Jan '08

18 Jan '08

Transpo: - Mark Sanchez will likely be running on free Muni platform. - Free Muni - Expanding transit to address climate change and peak oil - Updating Transit Platform Sustainability: - Community Choice (Need More Involvement - Hearing Soon) & The Mayor's Poisonous Solar Initiative - Combustion Turbines (Action/Hearings Soon) - Peak Oil Taskforce Update - Candlestick Development & Initiatives susan vaughan wrote: > What would be on the agenda? I'd really like to avoid going down to > SoMa if I can. > > Sue > > */Eric Brooks <brookse32(a)aim.com>/* wrote: > > Shall we go with a joint meeting this month, starting at 6:30pm with > Transportation? > > I can be available either evening. > > peace > > Eric > _______________________________________________ > Transpo mailing list > Transpo(a)sfgreens.org > https://list.sfgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/transpo > > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try > it now. > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8…> -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0

[Sustain] Joint Sustain/Transpo Meeting On Wed or Thu the 23rd or 24th?
by Eric Brooks 17 Jan '08

17 Jan '08

Shall we go with a joint meeting this month, starting at 6:30pm with Transportation? I can be available either evening. peace Eric

1 0

[Sustain] Tell food companies you won't eat food from clones!
by Eric Brooks 17 Jan '08

17 Jan '08

Center for Food Safety <http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/home.cfm> *Tell food companies you won't eat food from Clones!* /FDA Approves Food from Clones against the Will of Congress and the American Public/ Despite scant data, congressional action demanding further research and over 150,000 public comments in opposition, FDA approved the sale of meat and milk from cloned animals yesterday. In addition, the FDA will not require any special procedures for tracking or handling food products from clones. It will not require labeling of any kind on food products from clones or their offspring, depriving consumers of their right to know about the origins of their food. This action comes at a time when Congress has voted twice to delay FDA's decision on cloned animals until additional safety and economic studies can be completed. The FDA's bullheaded action disregards the will of the public and Congress. FDA based their decision on an incomplete and flawed review that relies on studies supplied by cloning companies that want to force cloning technology on American consumers. FDA's action has placed the interests of a handful of biotech firms above those of the public they are charged with protecting. While FDA may deem these products safe to enter the market, companies like Ben & Jerry's and Organic Valley have pledged not to use cloned animals or their offspring. Dean Foods, Hormel, Tyson and Smithfield Foods have also stated they do not plan to accept milk or meat from cloned animals, but have not addressed their plans regarding the offspring of clones. *Sign the Clone-Free Pledge! Let food companies know you won't buy food from clones. <http://ga3.org/campaign/clone_pledge/8un56k8r275bmjxm?>* While animal cloning has been banned for use in organic production, we need to let other companies know that we will not buy their products if they are from animal clones or the offspring of clones. *What else can you do? *_1. Buy organic meats and dairy if you eat animal products. _The National Organic Standards rightly prohibit clones and their offspring from use. _2. Tell Congress to Label Food from Cloned Animals! <http://ga3.org/campaign/Cloning_Label> _There are bills to label food from clones and their offspring in both the House and Senate. Contact your Congress members and urge them to support this important bill! **If the links in this email don't work visit http://ga3.org/campaign/clone_pledge <http://ga3.org/ct/wpeJFss1XEwC/> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this. Tell-a-friend! <http://ga3.org/join-forward.html?domain=cfs&r=N1eJFssqpmfs> If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for Center for Food Safety <http://ga3.org/cfs/join.html?r=N1eJFssqpmfsE>. <http://www.convio.com>

1 0

[Sustain] Nader, McKinney Green Party Presidential Forum video
by Don Eichelberger 15 Jan '08

15 Jan '08

Check my Green Uprising blog (see below) for some footage of 1/13/08 Green Party Presidential Forum with Cynthia McKinney, Kat Swift, Kent Mespley, Jared Ball, Jesse Johnson, Jr. and Ralph Nader. I am still uploading video, so more will be added. Sorry bout the sound, Don Don Eichelberger DJ Fix Independent Productions Green Uprising Blog www.greenuprising.blogspot.com My You Tube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctRp5rGJoUc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iySwwyZfDgE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r9rK8nPREA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5UbnJ0kUqo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SktIYTyC1U Donny Fix del.icio.us book marks http://del.icio.us/donnyfix The Hegelian/Marxist goal is emancipation. Marx said it best in 1843: "Human emancipation wll only be complete when the real, individual man (sic) is absorbed into himself the abstract citizen; when as an individual man, in his every day life, in his work and in his relationships, he has become a species-being (politically accountabe to the whole); and when he recognizes and realizes his own power as social powers, so that he no longer separates this social power from himself as political power."

1 0

Re: [Sustain] MSNBC.com Article: Vermont cows help power 330 homes
by Eric Brooks 10 Jan '08

10 Jan '08

Yup. I have an opinion of 'cow power' and it isn't a good one at all. First, it gives a dangerous positive image to biofuel/biomass. While it may be used in this particular case on a non-factory farm, it will so excite the public and politicians, that every factory farm in the country will soon end up being equipped for biogas energy production giving even more profit to the factory farm industry and expanding it; leading to higher greenhouse gas emissions. (This is very similar to people getting excited about french fry grease, and then having that excitement cynically amplified so cleverly by big ag, that Congress passes massive corn ethanol subsidies.) Finally, and most importantly, the methane from those farms wouldn't exist in the first place if we were doing the critical work of getting people to eat much lower on the food chain (vegetarian/vegan/etc.) thereby using massively less energy and resources, and cutting the amount of methane and CO2 produced by agriculture prodigiously. Remember that methane is 20 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than is CO2, so the more we promote animal agriculture, literally the deeper shit we are in; on the ground, in our waterways, and in our atmosphere. cheers Eric Ann Garrison wrote: > > COW POWER: very natural gas in the State of Vermont: > > > Vermont cows help power 330 homes > > Some 1,500 cows at a Vermont farm are producing more than just milk, > they're generating electricity to sell on the power grid. > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6838687/from/ET/ > > > The one thing no one's done to BVHP yet is a factory farm, like maybe > one to power > > those gas-fired plants, right? Or, did I miss it? Has the SFPUC > already got this in the works. > > > However, I don't think this thing in Vermont is a factory farm. it > seems kinda cool. People seem to be willing to pay more per kilowatt > to support Vermont's family farmers in this very natural gas project > that involving no digging, no drilling, no leaks, and no potential > explosions. > > > I never saw any factory farms when I went to Vermont, but that of > course doesn't mean they don't have any. > > > I did see lots of cows roaming around in the fields there, and the > smell could all but overwhelm, > > though some told me that was just as often the smell of hay drying. > > > I'm wondering, particularly, whether Eric Brooks here has an opinion > of COW POWER, so long as > > there's no factory farming involved. Eric? --Annie > > > > > > > = -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0

Re: [Sustain] Mayor Cuts Leah Shahum From MTA
by pamndave＠speakeasy.net 09 Jan '08

09 Jan '08

1 0

[Sustain] Mayor Cuts Leah Shahum From MTA
by Eric Brooks 09 Jan '08

09 Jan '08

The Mayor just got rid of a strong alternative transportation advocate on the MTA. See lower down in this SF Guardian Article; http://www.sfbg.com/printable_entry.php?entry_id=5385 Heads roll /Newsom accepts more than two dozen resignation letters/ By Steven T. Jones In the week leading up to Mayor Gavin Newsom's Jan. 8 second-term inauguration ceremony, he accepted more than two dozen of the resignation letters he demanded Sept. 10, 2007, from his senior staff. "Today I am proud to introduce a new team of 27 people that is a blend of fresh talent, extensive policy expertise, and proven experience in government," Newsom wrote in a prepared statement released at 5 p.m. on Jan. 4, a Friday, which is not considered the spot in the news cycle for "proud" announcements. "Other than the very unfortunate firing of Susan Leal from the [general manager job at the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission] --- who, by all accounts, has been doing a good job --- the rest of the changes are fairly perfunctory and far from the bold or audacious move he promised," Board of Supervisors president Aaron Peskin told us. Yet the changes --- which the /Guardian/ discusses in more detail in Editor's Notes, the editorial page, and our politics blog --- do seem to signal that Newsom is placing a high value on personal loyalty and political pragmatism. Some examples are the promotions of inner-circle members Mike Farrah (new director of the Mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services), Ben Rosenfield (controller), and Wade Crowfoot (now the newly created director of climate protection initiatives) and the hiring of former United States attorney Kevin Ryan, a conservative Republican, to head the Mayor's Office of Criminal Justice. But gone are Leal and Metropolitan Transportation Agency board member Leah Shahum, the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition director who has chided the mayor for not supporting alternative transportation. "The Mayor's Office was none too pleased that the SFBC did not endorse him," she told us, noting that she is urging Newsom to fill the spot with another advocate for sustainable transportation. "I hope this is not a sign of what's to come." Wednesday January 9, 2008 -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0

Re: [Sustain] [SFGP-A] SFBG: Close The Zoo
by Eric Brooks 09 Jan '08

09 Jan '08

Good article Marc, Glad you got it published. Every zoo in the world should be converted into an animal rescue and endangered species recovery facility, with, as you suggest, scheduled, structured, guided observation for students, to educate them about wild animals and their current struggle with human civilisation. peace Eric marc wrote: > http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=5386&catid=4&volume_id=317&issue_id=… > <http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=5386&catid=4&volume_id=317&issue_id=…> > > <http://www.sfbg.com/printable_entry.php?entry_id=5386> > > <http://www.sfbg.com/printable_entry.php?entry_id=5386#> > > > Shut down the zoo > > /The Zoo should be closed, its animals sent to facilities capable of > caring for them, and the land used for affordable housing/ > > By Marc Solomon > > *OPINION* In San Francisco's June 1997 special election, the swells > convinced the voters to float $48 million in bonds to build a > "world-class" zoo, which would entail largely privatizing a public > institution, leaving the city on the hook for liabilities while giving > a private nonprofit the benefits. > > The initiative passed --- you can't get warmer or fuzzier than a tiger > or a koala --- and the San Francisco Zoo, relinquished to the tutelage > of corporate fixer Jim Lazarus, was largely gifted as another > privatized party space for the rich. > > The case might be made that zoos can serve as genetic incubators in > the face of widespread habitat destruction. But the city's > precautionary principle, like the Hippocratic oath, should prevail on > us to do no harm in seeking to prevent extinction. > > The record of the privatized Zoo has hardly been a story of precaution: > > *. *In 2000, two already sick koalas were kidnapped from the Zoo > and not returned for two days. > > *.* A 12-year-old Siberian tiger, Emily, died in October 2004. > Tatiana was just murdered at age four. Siberian tigers generally live > to be 24 years old in captivity. > > *.* Two elands, majestic African antelope, were introduced > improperly into close quarters with an already resident eland at the > Zoo, which led to a spate of deadly eland-on-eland violence and the > deaths of the two newcomers. > > *.* Apparently, shoddy attention to detail hastened the demise of > Puddles the hippopotamus in May 2007. Hippos, like African elephants, > thrive in nature preserves located in their native tropical habitat. > > If zoos are to be a successful component of protecting endangered > species, it's paramount that their conditions not kill the specimens. > Perhaps an affiliation with a major research institution is required > to ensure that professionalism is the order of the day to ward against > what appears to be amateur hour at the zoo. > > It's one thing for the swells to occupy public spaces such as the de > Young Museum, City Hall, and the San Francisco Public Library as > edifications to their egos --- only fellow humans are inconvenienced. > But for the rich to wrap themselves in the distinction of being movers > and shakers in the San Francisco Zoological Society and wring glee > from the glow of imprisoning animals in inhospitable conditions is > truly pathological. > > The Zoo should be closed, its animals sent to facilities capable of > caring for them, and the land used for affordable housing. The city > should replace the Zoo with an academic partnership with legitimate > wildlife sanctuaries around the world to subsidize conservation, > produce video footage of animals in their natural habitats, and > arrange trips to see wild animals in the wild for San Francisco youths > who otherwise could not afford it. > > That would be a true 21st-century, world-class approach to bringing > the wonder of exotic animals to San Franciscans. > > *Marc Salomon* > > /Marc Salomon is a member of the SF Green Party County Council./ > > Wednesday January 9, 2008 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > San Francisco Green Party Active Members List > To unsubscribe or edit your options, go here: > https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/active > -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0

[Sustain] Fwd: Naive Fog City Report On Bogus Hunters Point Clean-Up
by Eric Brooks 04 Jan '08

04 Jan '08

http://www.fogcityjournal.com/news_in_brief/pr_hunters_point_cleanup_fundin… Pelosi, Feinstein, Newsom announce federal funding for Hunters Point shipyard cleanup Newsom says redevelopment will not result in gentrification San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Dianne Feinstein today announced $82 million in federal funding for the toxic clean up of the Hunters Point Shipyard superfund site. *Photos by Luke Thomas <http://www.fogcityjournal.com/profiles/profile_luke_thomas.shtml>* *By Luke Thomas <http://www.fogcityjournal.com/profiles/profile_luke_thomas.shtml>* January 3, 2008 Joined by Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Dianne Feinsten, Mayor Gavin Newsom today announced $82 million in federal funding for the toxic cleanup of the Hunters Point Shipyard superfund site. "This is a huge victory for San Francisco in general and the Bayview Hunters Point Community in particular," Newsom said. "With these funds in hand, the City will be able to continue moving forward with its plans to transform the long-shuttered Shipyard from a environmental blight on the community into a world-class location providing waterfront parks, thousands of jobs, affordable housing and a major clean technology campus." Mayor Newsom, who made several trips to Washington D.C. in the past year to persuade federal officials that the cleanup of the Shipyard should be a major priority for the federal delegation, praised the work of Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Dianne Feinstein in securing the cleanup money for the Shipyard. "At a time when the Department of Defense is spending less and less money every year cleaning up closed, toxic military bases, this level of funding is truly remarkable," Newsom said. "It is a testament to the strong leadership and commitment of Speaker Pelosi and Senator Feinstein to get the Shipyard cleaned up on time and in a manner that will allow us to implement the community's vision for revitalizing the City's southeastern waterfront." The federal funds will be used to prepare over 100 acres of land at the Shipyard for transfer to the City at no cost, including land slated for new housing, parks and approximately 25 acres for a potential site for a new stadium for the San Francisco 49ers. Asked what assurances he could provide to the Bayview Hunters Point community to allay fears of gentrification due to redevelopment, Newsom told Fog City Journal: "That's why 42 percent of the work being done is being done by local builders on Parcel A. That's why 30 percent of all the housing that's being developed out here on Parcel A is affordable housing. That's why we're rebuilding public housing units, one-to-one replacement, and providing mixed-income opportunities for people at all income levels by rebuilding public housing. That's why we're including protections and provisions that are very similar for the rest of the project." "One thing I will not do is sit back and do nothing, and continue to see the rates of prostate cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer rise in the southeast sector - and asthma rates - because we didn't have the courage to actually step up and actually get something done. And that's something I'm very proud that we've advanced," Newsom said. #### -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0

[Sustain] SF Chron Front Page Attacks Wind Power
by Eric Brooks 03 Jan '08

03 Jan '08

Hey all, This was yesterday's top front page story from the SF Chronicle... http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/01/02/MNITTM9FA.DT… THE DEADLY TOLL OF WIND POWER Despite yearlong effort to curb bird deaths by turbines on the Altamont Pass, many still have perished Charles Burress, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, January 2, 2008 Wind turbines rise above the fog on the hills of the Alta... A golden eagle was found dead near one of the Altamont Pa... Members of Alameda County's avian-mortality monitoring te... Rick Koebbe, president of PowerWorks Inc., with some of t... More... The long hot summers of the San Joaquin Valley suck great tsunamis of cool coastal air through the Altamont Pass, producing winds so powerful that a person can lean nearly 45 degrees without falling down. Such awesome force gave birth in the early 1980s to the world's largest collection of wind turbines, pioneers in what is now America's fastest-growing form of renewable energy and an increasingly important weapon in the battle against global warming. But the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area is also a symbol of the wind industry's biggest stain - the killings of thousands of birds, including majestic golden eagles, by turbines. The result has been a wrenching civil war among those who are otherwise united in the struggle to save the planet and its creatures. It's been nearly a year since a controversial legal settlement was forged among wildlife groups, wind companies and Alameda County regulators. That agreement, opposed by some parties to the dispute, promised to reduce deaths of golden eagles and three other raptor species by 50 percent in three years and called for the shutdown or relocation of the 300 or so most lethal of the approximately 5,000 windmills at Altamont. But five scientists appointed by the county say the settlement and accompanying efforts to reduce bird deaths are not on track to meet the 50 percent goal, and they recently surveyed the Altamont to determine which additional turbines should be removed or relocated to spots less likely to kill birds. Known officially as the Scientific Review Committee, the panel agreed Dec. 21 that more turbines need to be removed or relocated. It issued a new list of 309 targeted turbines, plus 102 more if the wind companies refuse to continue a current, temporary shutdown of all their windmills into February. The wind operators had previously agreed to a two-month shutdown, for November and December. The newly named lethal turbines are in addition to the dozens already shut down under the settlement's plan to gradually remove the most deadly windmills. FPL Energy, the company with the most turbines in the Altamont, has not seen the specifics of the new recommendations from the scientists and cannot comment, company spokesman Steven Stengel said last week. The scientists' findings are advisory for a continuing "meet and confer process" among all the parties, who are under instructions from Alameda County officials - who exercise regulatory authority over the wind farms - to negotiate mutually acceptable solutions. "We are deeply distressed about the continuing bird deaths and about the companies not being on track for the 50 percent reduction," said Elizabeth Murdock, executive director of the Golden Gate Audubon Society, a chief plaintiff in the lawsuit that has reshaped the battle over the birds. But Stengel said, "It is too early in the process to accurately judge whether we are on track." The scientific review is meant to find ways of protecting the birds without putting the companies out of business, he said. No one knows for sure how many birds are killed by the Altamont turbines - a 2004 California Energy Commission report estimated the golden eagle toll to be between 75 and 116 a year, while total bird kills were put in the 1,766 to 4,721 range. The Audubon Society lawsuit targets four raptor species - golden eagle, red-tailed hawk, American kestrel and burrowing owl - which suffered 456 to 1,129 fatalities per year, the study estimated. Subsequent data indicate that bird deaths have not decreased since the settlement was reached last January and that efforts to achieve a 50 percent reduction in three years are far behind, said Shawn Smallwood, an independent consultant in avian ecology who co-authored the 2004 California Energy Commission study and is one of the five county-appointed scientists. James Walker, president-elect of the industry-backed American Wind Energy Association, said the wind companies also want to save birds and are helping to fund the study of the problem. He also said wind power helps save bird lives by combatting global warming, which the National Audubon Society acknowledges as a threat to many bird species. Rick Koebbe, head of Altamont Winds Inc., another of the half-dozen firms that own turbines in the Altamont, said the impact on birds has to be weighed against the human deaths and diseases that are reduced by using wind power instead of pollution-producing fossil fuels. Numerous surveys and studies of dead birds have taken place in the Altamont going back to at least 1992, but the analysis, according to a 2005 Government Accountability Office review of the studies, "has been complicated by confounding variables." The problem is not simply birds running into spinning blades. Many dead birds have been found around turbines that were turned off. Some have been electrocuted by live wires near operating turbines, while others apparently were killed by predators. Despite the perplexing data, many experts agree that a chief cause of bird deaths is the sheer number of windmills at Altamont, which features many old, small turbines in the 100-kilowatt range. More modern wind farms employ taller, more powerful machines able to generate 1 to 3 megawatts. Replacing the many old turbines with fewer, more powerful ones - a process termed "repowering" - is official county policy and would be "a big part of the solution," Murdock said. The idea is that bigger turbines would not only dramatically reduce the spinning blades to about one-tenth of their current number but also turn more slowly and be higher off the ground, presumably moving them farther away from raptors that dive for mice and other prey. "Repowering is supposedly the silver bullet, if there is one," said Chris Gray, chief of staff for Alameda County Board of Supervisors President Scott Haggerty, whose district includes Altamont. But full repowering would cost about $1 billion - money that the wind companies may not be able to afford, Walker said. Finding the right balance for wind and birds is the central focus of the settlement agreement, which brought a legal truce to a 3-year-old lawsuit by five chapters of the Audubon Society and Californians for Renewable Energy. The plaintiffs had sued Alameda County, contending that the renewed wind-power permits approved by the county in 2005 violated the California Environmental Quality Act and didn't do enough to protect the birds. About 78 percent of the Altamont turbines are in Alameda County, with the remainder in Contra Costa County, which is not part of the lawsuit or settlement. Implementing the agreement and its core mandate of figuring out which turbines are the most dangerous has meant spending a lot of hours among the windmills for the scientists. "This is one of the places that had the highest mortality rates," said Rutgers University biologist Joanna Burger, pointing to a ridge of turbines as she and the four other scientists huddled against the chilly wind on their recent four-day tour. It's a formidable task among the thousands of windmills that stand in irregular rows like a scattered army of propeller-headed sentinels on the rolling hills and ridges of Altamont. The site is spread over 50 square miles, an expanse larger than the city of San Francisco. An invaluable help in their search was Brian Karas, part of the bird-death monitoring group, which consists of six full-time workers who spend their days dodging rattlesnakes and cow pies to search for and count dead birds. Holding a map flecked with different-colored Post-it notes, Karas rattled off mortality data. "Kestrel," he said pointing to one turbine where a dead kestrel was found. "Nothing, nothing," he said of the next two turbines, where no dead birds have been found. "Two red-tail," he said of the fourth windmill. Although the settlement is supported by the county, most of the wind companies and the Audubon societies, it also faces opposition. Koebbe's company refused to join the pact, in large part because it didn't want to pay legal fees of the plaintiffs, he said. Also opposing the settlement is the Center for Biological Diversity, which filed a separate suit directly against the windmill companies, saying the firms were illegally killing wildlife protected by state and federal law. An Alameda County Superior Court judge rejected the suit, ruling that migratory birds are not "public trust property." The decision has been appealed; no court date has been set. Alameda County Supervisor Gail Steele voted against the pact because she wanted a more accelerated reduction in bird deaths. "I understand this is an economic hardship to the wind farms, but how do you know how much of a hardship?" she said. "Nobody ever opens their books." Nevertheless, Steele said, both the wind industry and the birds need to be protected. "All environmentalists should support both things," she said. Online resources 2004 California Energy Commission report on Altamont bird deaths: links.sfgate.com/ZBVR 2005 U.S. Government Accountability Office report on wind power's impacts on wildlife: links.sfgate.com/ZBXU In Bay Area: A National Park Service contest enlists public to help protect endangered species. B1 Get involved To address the issue of wind power and bird deaths at Altamont, contact: -- The Alameda County Planning Department, which is coordinating a legal settlement and scientific review: (510) 670-5400. -- The Alameda County Board of Supervisors, which will eventually revisit the Altamont issues: (510) 272-6984; www.acgov.org/board. -- The Golden Gate Audubon Society: (510) 843-2222; www.goldengateaudubon.org. -- FPL Energy, the largest wind operator in the Altamont: www.fplenergy.com. -- The American Wind Energy Association: (202) 383-2500; www.awea.org. -- Center for Biological Diversity: (415) 436-.9682; www.biologicaldiversity.org. E-mail Charles Burress at cburress(a)sfchronicle.com. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/02/MNITTM9FA.DTL This article appeared on page A - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." – Che Guevara

2 2