- Sustainability - list.sfgreens.org

[Sustain] Ministers Tied To Lennar In Development Deals
by Eric Brooks 06 Aug '07

06 Aug '07

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/08/02/BA8KRBF742.D… Ministers have financial ties to developer Hunters Point shipyard condos safe and important, they say - some with health fears outraged Matthai Chakko Kuruvila and Leslie Fulbright, Chronicle Staff Writers <mailto:mkuruvila@sfchronicle.com> Thursday, August 2, 2007 Two of the San Francisco church leaders who this week praised plans to build condominiums on the former Hunters Point Naval Shipyard have an economic stake in the development - as partners with the project's main developer, the Lennar Corp. While the ministers say they have been up front about their involvement, it came as a shock to some community members. Some residents of Bayview-Hunters Point are protesting the development because they say dust kicked up from the site is causing health problems, such as asthma and nosebleeds. Hundreds of supporters and opponents of the project turned out Tuesday at a Board of Supervisors meeting about the health concerns. The ministers - the Rev. Arelious Walker of True Hope Church of God in Christ and the Rev. J. Edgar Boyd of Bethel AME - said at the meeting that there is no proof that naturally occurring asbestos and dust are a danger, and they urged the project to move forward. The city Public Health Department and other agencies said it is impossible to test the health effects of the dust and there is no proof it is a danger. The Board of Supervisors voted to let the project continue. Boyd, in his testimony at the public hearing, did not acknowledge his financial relationship with Lennar. Walker said that he represented Tabernacle Affiliated Developers, but did not explain what that is. The ministers acknowledged the financial relationship when asked about it on Wednesday by The Chronicle. Boyd and Walker are part of a 2-year-old development team - Tabernacle Affiliated Developers - that includes the Rev. James McRay of Jones Memorial United Methodist Church, the Rev. Donald Green of San Francisco Christian Center and Calvin Jones of Providence Baptist Church. Under their contract with Lennar, the Tabernacle group will build about 200 affordable homes, Walker said. The profits from those home sales will go to Tabernacle and the five ministers. They pointed to press releases and Web sites explicitly disclosing the relationship, and said they regularly tell their parishioners about their development efforts, which don't involve church money. They said they began their affordable housing development efforts to stanch African American flight from the city to cheaper suburbs. Redevelopment has historically driven African Americans from neighborhoods like the Western Addition, said Walker, 76, a lifelong resident of the Bayview. The area's toxic land, lack of jobs, inadequate housing and high crime all are problems, Walker said. But, he added, because construction dust cannot be proved to be a health issue, the development should move forward. "We need some strong economic development to change the paradigm for quality of life," he said. Bayview community activist Marie Harrison said she was outraged to learn that local ministers are working with Lennar as developers. "Some of these pastors can't decipher between church and politics," she said. "When I found out J. Edgar Boyd was in business with Lennar, my stomach did loops. "I really think there should be a separation between religion and politics. He doesn't even live in this community nor have a church in this community. He has no connection." Christopher Muhammad, a Nation of Islam minister who runs a school in the area, said his students suffer health problems from the dust and called for a halt to the development until health tests are done. "I am in pain because I do see a community so wounded, so ill-affected by its economic deprivation over the years that they are forced to choose between their health and jobs," said Muhammad. Kofi Bonner, president of Lennar's urban land division and the company's leading executive in San Francisco, said the company is required to work with "community builders" as part of its redevelopment agreement. Faith-based groups are among the options, he said. "It's all very aboveboard," Bonner said. Boyd said the community will gain from Tabernacle's involvement. "Our company will profit but also offer opportunities for the community," Boyd said. "You cannot help someone off the ground if you are on the ground yourself. "We will get above ground and then reach back and assist." /E-mail the writers at mkuruvila(a)sfchronicle.com <mailto:mkuruvila@sfchronicle.com> and lfulbright(a)sfchronicle.com <mailto:lfulbright@sfchronicle.com>./ http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/08/02/BA8KRBF742.DTL This article appeared on page *B - 1* of the San Francisco Chronicle

1 0

[Sustain] Peskin Becoming A Menace - Preparing To Make Deal On Parking
by Eric Brooks 06 Aug '07

06 Aug '07

Hey all, Any of you with any influence on Peskin should tell him to get the hell back in the progressive camp, or we will campaign against him if he runs for higher office. In the latest of a long string of betrayals, Peskin is preparing to make a compromise on parking. see below or http://www.examiner.com/printa-865822~Opponents_ask_for_space_on_S.F._parki… Opponents ask for space on S.F. parking issue A possible compromise would bring an end to a controversial parking initiative slated for the November ballot. <javascript:popUpWinPP('ShowPhoto.cfm?filename=/images/newsroom/3A608D94-3048-2F0A-AA7CB9F2F7EBEA1A.jpg&caption=A possible compromise would bring an end to a controversial parking initiative slated for the November ballot.','pp')> (Examiner file photo) A possible compromise would bring an end to a controversial parking initiative slated for the November ballot. Alexandria Rocha, The Examiner 2007-08-06 16:10:00.0 Current rank: # *10* of 7,004 SAN FRANCISCO - A controversial parking initiative slated for the November ballot may be left by the wayside, as a proposed deal between opposing forces could leave the measure with little financial and political support. Weekend negotiations between downtown business-interest groups, transit advocates and Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin produced a possible compromise that would derail a November measure to increase The City's parking supply and, at the same time, fuel support for a separate Muni reform initiative. While it's too late to make changes to either initiative, both of which will appear on the November ballot, transit advocates have asked backers of the parking initiative to withdraw support from the measure. In exchange, they will support a third initiative on the February ballot that would help increase parking throughout The City, but with greater restrictions than the current measure. "This is predicated on them no longer running a campaign," Peskin said. "It's 'yes' on Muni reform, 'no' on adding 100,000 cars to a city that already has half a million, and 'yes' to a sensible parking policy in February." The neighborhood parking initiative, backed by downtown businesses, would loosen parking restrictions and allow developers to build parking garages with little planning oversight. Transit advocates claim the measure would reverse decades of transit-first planning guidelines. If backers agree to withdraw support of the November parking measure, Peskin said he is ready to introduce a measure for the February ballot as early as today. However, Jim Ross, a consultant for the parking initiative, said Sunday that the campaign for the November parking initiative is still moving forward. "That may change next week," he said. "But as far as I know, there's no compromise or deal." Peskin's Sensible Parking Initiative for the February ballot would allow developers to build one parking space for each new unit in the Marina, Sunset, Richmond and Outer Mission neighborhoods. Specific neighborhood plans designed around public transit, such as the Balboa Park plan, could apply for an exemption from the one-to-one requirement. The February measure would retain the current parking restrictions downtown, while allowing developers to build one or more parking garages with a total of 1,500 new parking spaces in the South of Market neighborhood, according to Peskin, specifically the area bordered by Townsend Street in the southeast, 10th Street in the southwest, Howard Street in the northwest, and Sixth Street in the northeast. "What this compromise would do is allow us to make real progress on Muni and add a moderate amount of parking in appropriate places," said Gabriel Metcalf, executive director of the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research association, a local think tank. arocha(a)examiner.com <mailto:arocha@examiner.com> Examiner

1 0

Re: [Sustain] Fwd: CBS's Nuclear Revival
by Cal Broomhead 02 Aug '07

02 Aug '07

How about eliminating the Price Anderson Act? No insurance waiver means no nukes. We pushed a proposition in 1976 but it failed, though it sparked a lot of debate. Cal Broomhead and Kathleen Ribeiro broomhead(a)igc.org > [Original Message] > From: Don Eichelberger <done7777(a)sbcglobal.net> > To: Susan Swift <vencejo(a)mindspring.com> > Cc: <sustainability(a)sfgreens.org>; Lynda Hernandez <redwoodsforever(a)verizon.net>; <GPCA-Energy(a)yahoogroups.com>; <TrueGreen_NoNukes(a)yahoogroups.com> > Date: 6/12/2007 6:43:37 PM > Subject: Re: [Sustain] Fwd: CBS's Nuclear Revival > > I hope they were responsive to working together. > Seems we have "allies" almost everywhere we > look. It is a matter of finding ways to keep > each other in each other's loops and, if not > "coordinating efforts", at least making a buzz in unison. > > Overcoming the other side's media blitz will be a > big part of it. I am ccing the state Green Party > media guy, Cres, with a heads up that his help > would be good to have. The main media strategy > at present seems to be writing and responding to > blogs (my first blog is > www.greenuprising.blogspot.com) and writing > letters to editors for newspaper articles that promote nukes > > We need to do something newsworthy. We (SF Green > Sustainability Working Group) are considering > pushing Leno for stronger legislation than a > study, including opposing renewal of nuke > operating licenses in the state on the same grounds we now oppose new licenses. > > I would like to get something happening, > > Don > > At 07:48 AM 4/19/2007, you wrote: > >Great News! We have some allies outside the immediate environmental > >ncommunity. Thanks for sharing this Don. I'll write to CBS and FAIR. > > > >-Susan > > > >-- In TrueGreen_NoNukes(a)yahoogroups.com, Don Eichelberger > ><done7777@...> wrote: > > > > > > I looked at the 60 Minutes segment and said to > > > myself, "Noooooo! Not 60 Minutes, too!" I had > > > intended to respond to them, but got turned to > > > other things, until I got this alert. In case you want to respond.... > > > > > > Glad FAIR is doing this. > > > > > > Don > > > > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 11:27:06 -0700 > > > >From: "Richard A. Knee" <rak0408@...> > > > >To: "Knee Richard A." <rak0408@...> > > > >Subject: Fwd: CBS's Nuclear Revival > > > >------- Forwarded message ------- > > > >From: FAIR <fair@...> > > > >To: rak0408@... > > > >Cc: > > > >Subject: CBS's Nuclear Revival > > > >Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 10:34:18 -0700 > > > > > > > >http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3086 > > > > > > > >Action Alert > > > > > > > >CBS's Nuclear Revival > > > >60 Minutes' critic-free boosterism > > > > > > > >4/18/07 > > > > > > > >On April 8, the CBS newsmagazine 60 Minutes aired a segment about the > > > >"resounding success" of the French nuclear power program, > >suggesting that > > > >"emission-free" nuclear power might offer an easy solution to the > >problem > > > >of climate change. The report protected this dubious assertion from > > > >skeptical scrutiny by failing to quote a single bona fide critic of the > > > >nuclear industry. > > > > > > > >The segment was titled "Vive Les Nukes," which gave a good > >indication of > > > >the slant it took. Describing it as "an efficient means of > >producing large > > > >amounts of carbon-free energy," correspondent Steve Kroft announced > >at the > > > >top of the segment that nuclear power is "a technology whose time > >seemed > > > >to come and go, and may now be coming again." The notion of a nuclear > > > >power renaissance was bolstered by CBS's choice of interview guests�the > > > >program spoke only to nuclear power supporters (in France and > >elsewhere), > > > >thereby allowing their rhetoric to go unchallenged. > > > > > > > >Guests on the segment were French energy official Pierre Gadonniex, > >French > > > >nuclear industry executive Bertrande Durrande, White House deputy > > > >secretary of energy Clay Sell (Bush's "point man on nuclear power"), > > > >French nuclear executive Anne Lauvergeon, MIT nuclear researcher Andrew > > > >Kadak and David Jhirhad of the World Resources Institute, described > >as "an > > > >environmental think tank in Washington." > > > > > > > >Jhirhad was the only potentially balancing source, but he is quoted > >only > > > >to make Kroft's point that "even some environmental groups are taking a > > > >second look at nuclear power." This is an emerging line in much of the > > > >corporate media (e.g., Washington Post, 4/16/06; New York Times, > >2/27/07), > > > >though the actual number of green groups embracing nuclear power is > >quite > > > >small. The World Resources Institute receives contributions from > >several > > > >energy companies and other major polluters, information that would have > > > >been useful for CBS viewers in evaluating Jhirad's claim that the > >nuclear > > > >industry's "safety record has been pretty good." > > > > > > > >The segment's one-sided sourcing was made all the more problematic when > > > >the White House's Sell claimed that "no serious person can look at the > > > >challenge of greenhouse gases and climate change and not come to the > > > >conclusion that nuclear power has to play a significant and growing > >role > > > >in meeting that challenge worldwide." Of course, "serious people" do > > > >question precisely that--and CBS should have interviewed them. > > > > > > > >Excluding such sources meant excluding important information. While > > > >France's nuclear power is portrayed as widely popular, CBS failed to > > > >mention large protests held across the country on March 17 (Agence > >France > > > >Presse, 3/17/07) against construction of a new nuclear plant. Nor, in > > > >touting the massive nuclear reprocessing plant France has built in > > > >Normandy, did the show refer to the radiation it releases into the > >English > > > >Channel (NIRS Nuclear Monitor, 3-4/00) or the cluster of leukemia cases > > > >occurring around the plant (British Medical Journal, 1/11/97). > > > > > > > >Kroft even adopts industry-friendly language in describing the push to > > > >revive U.S. nuclear power, discussing the "financial incentives" and > > > >"streamlined regulatory system" intended to encourage nuclear energy > > > >development. Such "incentives" might better be described as government > > > >subsides, which have long been criticized by nuclear industry > >critics as a > > > >waste of taxpayers' money. Unmentioned in the CBS report were similar > > > >subsidies in France; according to the U.S.-based Institute for > >Energy and > > > >Environmental Research (5/4/06), $1 billion a year in government > >subsidies > > > >go to plutonium production alone. > > > > > > > >Excluding critical voices allowed grossly misleading information to go > > > >unchallenged, as when nuclear executive Lauvergeon claimed, in the > > > >segment's conclusion, that "wind and solar are, you know, temporary > > > >sources of energy. It works when you have wind, it works when you have > > > >sun. No sun, no wind, no energy. You don't want to watch TV only > >when you > > > >have wind." Of course, wind and solar energy are not "temporary" > >sources > > > >of energy; power generated by both can be stored. Airing this sort of > > > >misinformation eliminates any real consideration of viable > >alternatives to > > > >nuclear energy. > > > > > > > >At one point, Kroft says that "the Bush administration is pushing a > > > >nuclear revival." The same could be said for CBS. > > > > > > > > > > > >ACTION: > > > >Contact 60 Minutes to ask why its report on nuclear energy excluded the > > > >views of the industry's numerous critics. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >CONTACT: > > > >CBS 60 Minutes > > > >60m@... > > > >(212) 975-3247 > > > > > > > >****** > > > >Our subscriber list is kept confidential. To unsubscribe from this > >list > > > >at any time, visit our web at: > > > >http://www.demaction.org/fair/unsubscribe.jsp and follow the > > > >instructions. Or send an email to fair@... with > > > >"unsubscribe" in the subject line. > > > > > > > >Feel free to respond to FAIR ( fair@... ). We can't reply to > > > >everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate > > > >documented examples of media bias or censorship. And please send > >copies of > > > >your email correspondence with media outlets, including any > >responses, to > > > >fair@... > > > > > > > >Your donation to FAIR goes a long way. Help us hold mainstream media > > > >accountable. Make a difference -- support FAIR today! > > > >http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=103 > > > > > > > >If you would prefer to receive these messages in HTML format, > >please visit > > > >our website to change your Email Preferences. Go to: > > > >http://www.demaction.org/dia/organizations/fair/signUp.jsp?key=708. > > > > > > > >SUBSCRIBE TO EXTRA! AND GET FAIR FOUNDER JEFF COHEN'S NEW BOOK FOR > >FREE: > > > >Cable News Confidential: My Misadventures in Corporate Media > > > >http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=106 > > > > > > > >FAIR SHIRTS: Get your "Don't Trust the Corporate Media" shirt today at > > > >FAIR's online store: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=110 > > > > > > > >FAIR produces CounterSpin, a weekly radio show heard on over 130 > >stations > > > >in the U.S. and Canada. To find the CounterSpin station nearest > >you, visit > > > >http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=115 > > > > > > > >FAIR > > > >(212) 633-6700 > > > >http://www.fair.org/ > > > >E-mail: fair@... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >/*Your email ID. <diaEmailID='325422084' thread=5870/>--*/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > > > <HTML> > > > <HEAD> > > > <TITLE>FAIR Email</TITLE> > > > > > > <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> > > > </HEAD> > > > > > > <BODY style="font-family:serif; margin-top:0; > >margin-bottom:0;margin-left:0,margin-right:0; > >padding-right:0,padding-left:0; background-color:#FFFFFF;" > >BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" LEFTMARGIN="0" TOPMARGIN="0" MARGINWIDTH="0" > >MARGINHEIGHT="0"> > > > > > >  > > > > > > <table width="790"> > > > <tr> > > > <td> > > > > > > <TABLE WIDTH="760" CELLPADDING="0" CELLSPACING="0"> > > > <TR> > > > <TD> > > > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php"> > > > <IMG ALT="FAIR Logo Top" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_01.gif" WIDTH="266" HEIGHT="62" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD COLSPAN="10" BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="494" HEIGHT="62"></TD> > > > </TR> > > > <TR> > > > <TD> > > > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php"> > > > <IMG ALT="FAIR Logo Middle" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_03.gif" WIDTH="266" HEIGHT="19" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD> > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 3&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D100"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="About Us" NAME="header_04" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_04.gif" WIDTH="57" HEIGHT="19" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD COLSPAN="3"> > > > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 4&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D101"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="What's wrong with the news?" NAME="header_05" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_05.gif" WIDTH="145" HEIGHT="19" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD> > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 5&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D102"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="FAIR events" NAME="header_06" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_06.gif" WIDTH="68" HEIGHT="19" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD COLSPAN="2"> > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 6&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D139"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Support Us" NAME="header_07" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_07.gif" WIDTH="65" HEIGHT="19" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD COLSPAN="2"> > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 7&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D104"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="FAIR in the news" NAME="header_08" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_08.gif" WIDTH="92" HEIGHT="19" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD> > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 8&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D11"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Media Views" NAME="header_09" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_09.gif" WIDTH="67" HEIGHT="19" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > </TR> > > > <TR> > > > <TD> > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 9&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php" > > > > >  > > > <IMG ALT="FAIR Logo bottom" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_10.gif" WIDTH="266" HEIGHT="40" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD COLSPAN="2"> > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 10&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D2"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="What's New" NAME="header_11" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_11.gif" WIDTH="96" HEIGHT="40" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD> > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 11&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D3"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Archive" NAME="header_12" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_12.gif" WIDTH="97" HEIGHT="40" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD COLSPAN="3"> > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 12&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D4"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Extra!" NAME="header_13" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_13.gif" WIDTH="82" HEIGHT="40" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD COLSPAN="2"> > > >  > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 13&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D5"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Counterspin" NAME="header_14" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_14.gif" WIDTH="123" HEIGHT="40" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > <TD COLSPAN="2"> > > >  > > > <a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 14&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D6"> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Activism" NAME="header_15" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_15.gif" WIDTH="96" HEIGHT="40" > >BORDER="0"></A></TD> > > > </TR> > > > <TR> > > > <TD COLSPAN="11"> > > > <IMG ALT="Extra Collage" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/header_17.jpg" WIDTH="760" > >HEIGHT="27"></TD> > > > </TR> > > > <TR> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="266" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="57" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="39" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="97" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="9" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="68" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="5" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="60" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="63" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="29" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > <TD> > > > > > <IMG ALT="Spacer" SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/spacer.gif" > >WIDTH="67" HEIGHT="1"></TD> > > > </TR> > > > </TABLE> > > > </td> > > > </tr> > > > <tr> > > > <td font-family:serif; font-size: 86%;> > > >  > > >  > > > <table cellpadding="5" cellspacing="3" width="769" border="0"> > > > <tr> > > > <td style="font-family:serif; font-size: 86%;" valign="top" > >width="526"> >color=#8f4444> >class=communique_category><a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 15&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D3086">http://www.fair. org/index.php?page=3086</A>  > > > >class=communique_category>Action > >Alert >face=Georgia>CBS's Nuclear > >Revival >size=3>60 Minutes' critic-free > >boosterism >class=date>4/18/07 >class=published-content-body>On April 8, the > >CBS newsmagazine > >60 Minutes <a > > title="" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 16&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com%2Fstories%2F2007%2F04%2F06%2F60minutes%2 Fmain2655782.shtml" > >target=_blank>aired a > >segment</A> about the > >"resounding success" of the French nuclear power program, suggesting > >that "emission-free" nuclear power might offer an easy solution to the > >problem of climate change. The report protected this dubious assertion > >from skeptical scrutiny by failing to quote a single bona fide critic > >of the nuclear industry. The segment was titled "Vive Les > >Nukes," which gave a good indication of the slant it took. Describing > >it as "an efficient means of producing large amounts of carbon-free > >energy," correspondent Steve Kroft announced at the top of the segment > >that nuclear power is "a technology whose time seemed to come and go, > >and may now be coming again." The notion of a nuclear power > >renaissance was bolstered by >class=media_outlet>CBS's choice of interview > >guests�the program spoke only to nuclear power supporters (in France > >and elsewhere), thereby allowing their rhetoric to go > >unchallenged. Guests on the segment were French energy official > >Pierre Gadonniex, French nuclear industry executive Bertrande > >Durrande, White House deputy secretary of energy Clay Sell (Bush's > >"point man on nuclear power"), French nuclear executive Anne > >Lauvergeon, MIT nuclear researcher Andrew Kadak and David Jhirhad of > >the World Resources Institute, described as "an environmental think > >tank in Washington." Jhirhad was the only potentially balancing > >source, but he is quoted only to make Kroft's point that "even some > >environmental groups are taking a second look at nuclear power." This > >is an emerging line in much of the corporate media (e.g., >class=media_outlet>Washington Post, <a > > title="" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 17&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-dyn%2Fcontent%2Farticle%2F20 06%2F04%2F14%2FAR2006041401209.html" > >target=_blank> >size=3>4/16/06</A>; >class=media_outlet>New York Times, <a > >title="" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 18&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2007%2F02%2F27%2Fscience%2Fearth%2F27t ier.html%3Fei%3D5088%26amp%3Ben%3Dde61beaa4b05ed09%26amp%3Bex%3D1330232400%2 6amp%3Bpartner%3Drssnyt%26amp%3Bemc%3Drss%26amp%3Bpagewanted%3Dprint" > >target=_blank> >size=3>2/27/07</A>), though > >the actual number of green groups embracing nuclear power is quite > >small. The World Resources Institute <a title="" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 19&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wri.org%2Fpartners%2Fcontrib_financial.cfm" > >target=_blank>receives > >contributions</A> from > >several energy companies and other major polluters, information that > >would have been useful for >class=media_outlet>CBS viewers in evaluating > >Jhirad's claim that the nuclear industry's "safety record has been > >pretty good." The segment's one-sided sourcing was made all the > >more problematic when the White House's Sell claimed that "no serious > >person can look at the challenge of greenhouse gases and climate > >change and not come to the conclusion that nuclear power has to play a > >significant and growing role in meeting that challenge worldwide." Of > >course, "serious people" do question precisely that--and >class=media_outlet>CBS should have interviewed > >them. Excluding such sources meant excluding important > >information. While France's nuclear power is portrayed as widely > >popular, CBS failed > >to mention large protests held across the country on March 17 ( >class=media_outlet>Agence France Presse, > >3/17/07) against construction of a new nuclear plant. Nor, in touting > >the massive nuclear reprocessing plant France has built in Normandy, > >did the show refer to the radiation it releases into the English > >Channel (NIRS Nuclear > >Monitor, <a title="" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 20&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nirs.org%2Fmononline%2Fcogemamonitor.htm" > >target=_blank> >size=3>3-4/00</A>) or the > >cluster of leukemia cases occurring around the plant ( >class=media_outlet>British Medical Journal, > ><a title="" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 21&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bmj.com%2Fcgi%2Fcontent%2Ffull%2F314%2F7074%2F101" > >target=_blank> >size=3>1/11/97</A> >size=3>). Kroft even adopts industry-friendly language in > >describing the push to revive U.S. nuclear power, discussing the > >"financial incentives" and "streamlined regulatory system" intended to > >encourage nuclear energy development. Such "incentives" might better > >be described as government subsides, which have long been criticized > >by nuclear industry critics as a waste of taxpayers' money. > >Unmentioned in the >class=media_outlet>CBS report were similar > >subsidies in France; according to the U.S.-based Institute for Energy > >and Environmental Research (<a title="" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 22&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ieer.org%2Freports%2Fenergy%2Ffrance%2Flowcarbonrepo rt.pdf" > >target=_blank> >size=3>5/4/06</A>), $1 > >billion a year in government subsidies go to plutonium production > >alone. Excluding critical voices allowed grossly misleading > >information to go unchallenged, as when nuclear executive Lauvergeon > >claimed, in the segment's conclusion, that "wind and solar are, you > >know, temporary sources of energy. It works when you have wind, it > >works when you have sun. No sun, no wind, no energy. You don't want to > >watch TV only when you have wind." Of course, wind and solar energy > >are not "temporary" sources of energy; power generated by both can be > >stored. Airing this sort of misinformation eliminates any real > >consideration of viable alternatives to nuclear energy. At one > >point, Kroft says that "the Bush administration is pushing a nuclear > >revival." The same could be said for >class=media_outlet>CBS. >class=sub_headline>ACTION: Contact >class=media_outlet>60 Minutes to ask why its > >report on nuclear energy excluded the views of the industry's numerous > >critics. >class=sub_headline>CONTACT: >class=media_outlet>CBS > > >class=media_outlet>60 Minutes <A > >title="" href="mailto:60m@..."> >color=#015272 size=3>60m@...</A> >face=Georgia> (212) 975-3247 </td> > > > > > > <td style="font-family:serif; font-size: 86%;" valign="top" > >width="205"> > > > > > >  > > > <a > > style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 23&url=https%3A%2F%2Fsecure.democracyinaction.org%2Fdia%2Forganizations%2Ffa ir%2Fshop%2Fcustom.jsp%3Fdonate_page_KEY%3D2024"><IMG > >ALT="Donate" BORDER="0" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/side_donation.jpg"></A> > > >  > > > > > >  > > > <TABLE BORDER="1" CELLSPACING="0" CELLPADDING="5" > >BORDERCOLOR="#464F5C"> > > > <TR><TD WIDTH="190" BGCOLOR="#464F5C"> > > > > > > <a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 24&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D4"><IMG > >ALT="Extra!" BORDER=0 SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/side_extra.gif"></a> > > > > > > </TD> > > > </TR> > > > <TR><TD WIDTH="190" BGCOLOR="#D8DDF0"> > > > <DIV ALIGN="center"> > > > <a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 25&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D4"><IMG > >ALT="Current Cover" BORDER="0" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/extra_covers/010107.jpg" WIDTH="170" > >HEIGHT="222"></a> > > > </DIV> > > > > > > > > > > > > <a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 26&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D106">Click > >here to subscribe!</a> > > > > > > </TD></TR> > > > </TABLE> > > > > > >  > > > > > >  > > > > > > <TABLE BORDER="1" CELLSPACING="0" CELLPADDING="5" > >BORDERCOLOR="#464F5C"> > > > <TR><TD WIDTH="190" BGCOLOR="#464F5C"> > > > > > > <a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 27&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D110"><IMG > >ALT="FAIR store" BORDER="0" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/side_store.png"></a> > > > > > > </TD> > > > </TR> > > > <TR><TD WIDTH="190" BGCOLOR="#D8DDF0"> > > > > > > <a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 28&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D110"><IMG > >ALT="FAIR store" BORDER="0" > >SRC="http://secure.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/fair/images/wayt hingarent.gif"></a> > > > > > > back in print by > > popular demandFAIR's book-length > >debunking of one of talk radio's most notorious figures. .A timeless > >classic. 128 pages. > > > > > > </TD></TR> > > > </TABLE> > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > >  > > >   > > > > > >  > > > <TABLE BORDER="1" CELLSPACING="0" CELLPADDING="5" > >BORDERCOLOR="#464F5C"> > > > <TR><TD WIDTH="190" BGCOLOR="#464F5C"> > > > > > > <a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 30&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D5"><IMG > >ALT="CounterSpin" BORDER="0" > >SRC="http://www.fair.org/images/side_counterspin.gif" WIDTH="170" > >HEIGHT="38"></a> > > > > > > </TD> > > > </TR> > > > <TR><TD WIDTH="190" BGCOLOR="#D8DDF0"> > > > > > > <a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 31&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D3085">Richard > >Prince on Don Imus, Carlo Bonini on Niger forgeries</A> (4/13/07-4/19/07) > > > <a > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 32&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D29%26rss_content%3Dcou nterspin"><img > >alt="Podcast" border="0" > >src="http://www.fair.org/images/podcast.png"></a> > > > > > > </TD></TR> > > > </TABLE> > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > </td> > > > > > > </tr> > > > </table> > > > > > > </td> > > > </tr> > > > <tr> > > > <td style="font-family:serif; > > font-size: 86%; font-style:italic;"> > > > > > > <blockquote> > > > Feel free to respond to FAIR ( <a > > > href="mailto:fair@...">fair@...</a> ). We can't reply to everything, > > > but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate > >documented examples > > > of media bias or censorship. And please send copies of your > > > correspondence with media outlets, including any responses, to > > > <A style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="mailto:fair@...">fair@...</a>. > > > </blockquote> > > > > > > </td> > > > </tr> > > > <tr> > > > > > > > > > <td style="font-family:serif; > > font-size: 86%;" align="center"> > > > > > > > > > <hr style="border:1; > > width=80%; color: #33516B; height:1px;" > >align="center"> > > > > > > <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 33&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.demaction.org%2Ffair%2Funsubscribe.jsp">Unsubscribe< /a> > >from the FAIR list > > > > > > If you would prefer to receive these messages in text format, > >please visit > > > our > > > website to <a style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; > >color:#015272" > > > > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 34&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.demaction.org%2Fdia%2Forganizations%2Ffair%2Fprofile %2Flogin.jsp">change > > > your email preferences</a>. > > > > > > If you were > > forwarded this message and you want to receive > >future FAIR alerts > > > delivered directly to you, subscribe by clicking <a > >style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 35&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D129">here</a>. > > > > > > <a > > style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 36&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php">Home</a> > >| > > > <a > > style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 37&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D105">Contact > >Us</a> | > > > <a > > style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 38&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D139">Support > >Us</a> | > > > <a > > style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 39&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D144">RSS</a> > >| > > > <a > > style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 40&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D145">Privacy > >Policy</a> | > > > <a > > style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 41&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fair.org%2Findex.php%3Fpage%3D130">Copyright > >Policy</a> > > > > > >  > > > <a > > style="text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >rel="license" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 42&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcreativecommons.org%2Flicenses%2Fby-nc-nd%2F2.0%2F"><img > >alt="Creative Commons License" border="0" > >src="http://creativecommons.org/images/public/somerights20.gif" > >/></a> > > > > > > This work is licensed > > under a <a style="text-decoration:none; > >font-weight:bold; color:#015272" rel="license" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 43&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcreativecommons.org%2Flicenses%2Fby-nc-nd%2F2.0%2F">Crea tive > >Commons License</a>. > > > > > >  > > > > > > <hr style="border:1; > > width=20%; height: 1px; color: #33516B; > >text-align:center;"> > > > Site designed by the <a style="text-decoration:none; > >font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 44&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mayfirst.org">May > >First Technology Collective</a> > > > Email list services by > > <a style="text-decoration:none; > >font-weight:bold; color:#015272" > >href="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=325422084&url_num= 45&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.demaction.org">Democracy > >in Action</a> > > > > > > </td> > > > </tr> > > > </table> > > > > > > </BODY> > > > </HTML> > > > > > > <img width=1 height=1 > >src="http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/TrackImage?key=325422084"><diaEma ilID='325422084' > >thread=5870 /> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sustainability mailing list > Sustainability(a)sfgreens.org > https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainability

3 2

[Sustain] LAFCO Vacancy - Critical To SF Energy Policy
by Eric Brooks 01 Aug '07

01 Aug '07

Hey all see below, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) is incredibly influential on city energy policy and needs a member of the public to step forward as a citizen member. Please read, consider applying, and pass on to other clean energy and public communications policy advocates. rickgalb(a)aol.com wrote: See here: http://www.sfgov.org/site/bdsupvrs_page.asp?id=36743 Please apply for membership. LAFCo needs a third member to have a meeting. The regular member "member of the public" is out on maternity leave and her alternate (Cathleen Sullivan) has left for grad school. Anyone interested? Forward to anyone who might be interested. Rick

1 0

[Sustain] Senate 2007 Energy Bill Contains Sneak Nuke Subsidies
by Eric Brooks 01 Aug '07

01 Aug '07

Senate 2007 Energy Bill Contains Sneak Nuke Subsidies http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/politics/2007/07/our_nuclear_future.html Our unnecessary nuclear future by Amanda Witherell diablo canyon.jpg /photo of Diablo Canyon nuke plants courtesy of PG&E's Jim Zimmerlin/ Sigh. Just when you're starting to think something productive might occur in the legislature, enter the monkey wrench. A recently released study <http://www.ieer.org/carbonfree/index.html> outlines exactly how we could be planning for an energy future free of nuclear and coal. If only our leaders would quit pandering to industry and adopt such a plan, but instead it looks like the nuclear industry has quietly tucked a provision <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/31/washington/31nuclear.html?pagewanted=1&_r…> into the new energy bill that would provide billions of dollars of loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants. The nuclear power industry has long argued that new plants aren't feasible unless these subsidies are granted. They scored them in the 2005 energy bill and despite the overwhelming evidence that more renewable energy sources are needed, looks like the 2007 bill will allocate even more coin toward new nuclear power plants. A lot of bitching has always accompanied the tax credits and subsidies granted to renewable power sources like solar and wind, with a lot of scorn that these industries are too expensive to stand on their own and therefore can't serve our energy needs. But nuclear obviously can't either and has a proven track record of cost overruns. <http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/politics/2007/07/%E2%80%9D> And a dangerous new nuclear era is dawning, <http://www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id=3718&catid=4> with advocates <http://www.fanweb.org/patrick-moore/> claiming nuclear power plants are "emissions-free" and will save us from global warming. <http://www.sfbg.com/blogs/politics/2007/07/%E2%80%9D> To paraphrase one of my trusted sources, "That's like saying you don't fart and ignoring the giant crap you're leaving behind."

1 0

[Sustain] PG&E Using Large Hydro Scam For Meeting Renewable Standard
by Eric Brooks 01 Aug '07

01 Aug '07

PG&E is trying to scam its way to meet its renewable requirements by counting upgrades done on large hydro. http://www.sfbg.com/printable_entry.php?entry_id=4178 <http://www.sfbg.com/printable_entry.php?entry_id=4178> Dam scam /Are efficiency upgrades renewable energy?/ By Amanda Witherell A bill to have efficiency upgrades at large hydroelectric dams be considered renewable energy is floating through the State Legislature, with very few members swimming upstream against it. The legislation by Assemblymember Sam Blakeslee (R--San Luis Obispo) is supported by Pacific Gas and Electric Co., which indicated it could count an additional 460 gigawatt-hours toward its renewable portfolio standard if the rule were changed. The utility company delivered a total of 84,310 GWh of energy last year, and by 2010 it will be required to provide 20 percent of that from renewable sources. Small hydroelectric facilities of 30 megawatts or less are considered renewable. The bill received unanimous assembly approval, but opponents say efficiency upgrades at dams are or should be occurring anyway and don't deserve the coveted "renewable" title. "California's RPS program was established to promote generation of new renewable energy sources. The RPS program was not designed to simply reward actions that would have occurred without the program," the Planning and Conservation League wrote to the Senate Natural Resources Committee. The Sierra Club also opposes the bill, as does Sen. Carole Migden, whose press secretary, Tracey Fairchild, said, "It doesn't ultimately create one megawatt of true renewable energy." *(Witherell)* Tuesday July 31, 2007 -- "The past is the Textbook of Tyrants; the Future the Bible of the Free" - Herman Melville

1 0

Re: [Sustain] Fwd: Blue Angels
by Don Eichelberger 01 Aug '07

01 Aug '07

I went to http://www.quakeradio.com/cc-common/bformmail.cgi and told them: Fleet Week and the Blue Angels are a giant ad for militarism. Many of us in San Francisco, of all places, hold hope that people can, eventually, learn to deal with their differences in a more enlightened way than warfare. Humans should seek the capacity to move past "survival of the fittest", "might makes right", and other "stinkin' thinkin'. But, first, we need to stop glorifying war, especially to our young. Daly's legislation is well-meaning, but, if anything, it does not go far enough. Blue Angels are all the things Daly says they are, and more. When some of us see them, together with the whole Fleet Week pageantry, we are reminded of the newsreel scenes from earlier days of swastika-laden tanks or nuclear missiles with hammer and sickles streaming along before the review stand, and can only hang our head at what we have become. Don Eichelberger At 01:58 PM 7/31/2007, Richard A. Knee wrote: >A friend sent me the following: > >------- Forwarded message ------- >To: rak0408(a)earthlink.net >Subject: Blue Angels >Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:31:31 -0700 > >Rick-Yesterday on KQKE's "Progressive News Hour," just before 6 p.m., I >heard a part of a vicious attack on Chris Daly for proposing to stop the >Blue Angels' buzzing of SF. Not entirely sure who the speaker was, as I >tuned in partway through, but I'm guessing it was John Scott, who hosts >the show. He basically accused Daly of being unpatriotic, of attacking >our troops and our military, and of implying that the city doesn't need >or want the protection of the U.S. military. Also said Daly's assertions >that he was concerned about noise and safety were pretexts to cover his >anti-military position. The speaker, whoever he was, said he was antiwar >but that Daly and his proposal were over the edge or off the charts. >Sounds like they might need a little educating.

1 0

[Sustain] URGENT: Mayor, Peskin, Maxwell, SFPUC Ignoring CCA, Ramming Gas Plant Down SF's Throat This Month!
by Eric Brooks 26 Jul '07

26 Jul '07

All, This is extremely urgent, and the City needs all of you to move into action on it immediately. Please read this entire email so that you are really clear on what's going on. Here's the break down.. Knowing full well that San Francisco has a bid going out soon for a contract to quickly build 360 megawatts of renewable electricity capacity under Community Choice, Mayor Newsom, Board President Aaron Peskin, The City Attorney, SFPUC Staff, and Supervisor Sophie Maxwell, have made sudden moves over the past week to strong arm the Public Utilities Commissioners into approving a deal to install a 145 megawatt polluting natural gas power plant -inside- San Francisco (in the Bayview Hunters Point neighborhood). What makes this move particularly egregious is that the project had been out for bids for two years, and no contractors had expressed interest in building it. Our City and some Eastern neighborhood activists have spent the last few months building pressure and public comment against the power plant mainly in the form of constituent letters to the President of the SFPUC. Because of the lack of bids, and recent alarming news on the global warming front, this public comment was enough to finally turn the SFPUC Commissioners to be openly opposed to the construction of the plant, (when previously they had grudgingly supported it). The Commissioners told SFPUC staff that they wanted another option found, and scheduled a public hearing to discuss the plant during their July 10 meeting. This was the first hearing in years specifically held to discuss the plant (known popularly by the names Combustion Turbines (CTs) and SF Electric Reliability Project). This was a crucial chance for the public to at last speak directly in opposition to the building of the plant, and Eastern neighborhoods and Green Party activists sent out a widespread message to their lists to turn out public comment on July 10. Shockingly, at the beginning of the July 10 SFPUC meeting, it became clear that something really wrong had happened behind the scenes. SFPUC President Ryan Brooks announced at the beginning of the meeting that the power plant item was removed from the agenda. He gave no reason for the removal, and did not properly inform those gathered that they were permitted to speak on the matter, even though it had been removed. When the assembled public asked Commission staff why the item had been removed, staff deceived them into believing that it had been removed because the project had received no bids and that the SFPUC was likely to drop the project. Thinking that they had been given good news, many of the commentors then apparently left elated. Much later, in that very same meeting, as a surprise side and totally unrelated item to the one he was presenting, Deputy General Manager Tony Irons brought up the power plant project. He reiterated that the initial bid had no responses, BUT stated that various companies had recently come forward with -other- proposals for the contract that did not conform to the original request for bids. He told the Commissioners that he had worked with the City Attorney to make sure it was legal to negotiate one on one (with no competitive bids) with these companies even though their responses did not conform with the original request, and that the Attorney had said 'yes'. (He deceptively hinted that some of these proposals would mean that the plant would not be built in San Francisco). He announced to the Commissioners that he was proceeding in dialog with these contractors, and, believing that options were still on the table to halt the plant, the Commissioners expressed relief that another option might finally be found. Following that meeting, in the space of -two- weeks, Irons apparently sealed a sole source contract proposal with a company called J Power to design, build, own and operate the plant -in- San Francisco. Not only did this maneuvering result in a no-bid contract proposal, but it also set up a deal which allows J Power to own the plant and then transfer ownership of the plant to the City, for free, within 10-12 years. (Note within 10-12 years San Francisco will have built so much renewable and efficiency capacity that the plant will be worthless -except for parts sales to other communities which won't amount to much- UNLESS the City chooses to continue running the plant and gaining revenue from it.) The plant will cost at least $225 million to build, and because the City will not (as in the original proposal) pay for and own the plant, it is clear that J Power will run the plant as much as possible in that first decade of operation in order to make up their costs and make a profit. This last point is important, because the public has been deceptively told for years that the plant would be used as a peaker and -only- be run during power shortages. This clearly will not happen with private ownership. (And it would not have happened with City ownership either, because the City would have had to run the plant constantly to pay back the public revenue bonds spent to build it.) Finally in this scenario, apparently because they realized public opinion is beginning to grow strong enough to stop the plant construction, over the course of that same two weeks, The Mayor, City Attorney, and Supervisors Peskin and Maxwell, all joined together to send a communication to the SFPUC Commissioners asking them to immediately adopt a plan to allow Irons to go forward in negotiations with J Power to build the plant. The item was immediately scheduled for the SFPUC's next meeting (July 24) as an action item. The SFPUC Commissioners complained to staff about being directed to adopt the item, but Staff was extremely persuasive and insistent, and in the end, the Commissioners voted 3-1 to adopt it anyway; with only Adam Werbach finally showing a little courage and voting against the project. One last important note is that Sophie Maxwell also tried to sneak through a Board resolution that same day, directing the SFPUC to proceed with the plant, in the 'Adoption Without Committee Reference' calendar, but Chris Daly caught the maneuver and sent it to Committee. It is absolutely vital that we take immediate action to stop this process for moving forward. cheers Eric

1 0

[Sustain] Sustainability Meeting This Thu, July 26, 7:30pm, SFGP Office (Lennar/Bayview/Powerplants/Biofuel-Resolution)
by Eric Brooks 23 Jul '07

23 Jul '07

Hi all, Because summer is often a low attendance time, please respond if you plan to attend so that we can prepare. The Sustainability Working Group Meeting is this Thursday, July 26, 7:30pm at the SF Green Party Office 1028-A Howard between 6th and 7th near Civic Center BART/Muni. Likely Topics Of Discussion - Joining efforts of East side residents to halt Redevelopment gentrification and Lennar Corporation's abuses/toxic emissions - Update on the campaign to stop the Williams natural gas turbines from being installed in the Bayview - Update on Peak Oil Taskforce - Update on the Community Choice renewable energy project - Update on Liquid Natural Gas Terminal projects in California, Oregon, and elsewhere - Adoption of an anti-biofuels/bioplastics policy and proposed actions to the Board of Supervisors cheers Eric Brooks -- "The past is the Textbook of Tyrants; the Future the Bible of the Free" - Herman Melville

1 0

[Sustain] Article: Nuke "surge" against renewable solution to global warming in California
by Eric Brooks 21 Jul '07

21 Jul '07

http://www.counterpunch.org/wasserman07172007.htmlJuly 17, 2007 /California's New Nukes War/ Nuclear Surge By HARVEY WASSERMAN A major pro-nuke "surge" against the renewable solution to global warming is about to erupt in California. State assemblyman Chuck DeVore (R-Irvine) has moved for a statewide vote to allow new nuclear power plants to be built in the Golden State. He wants to repeal the 1976 law requiring a solution to the nuke waste problem before new reactors are built. A business cartel says it wants to build a new reactor near downtown near downtown Fresno. (For more information on the California situation, visit http://www.a4nr.org/) So the nation's biggest state may soon be at war over new nukes. In essence, it's King CONG (Coal, Oil, Nukes and Gas) versus Solartopia. The core issue is who will control our energy: corporations, or the public. The irony is that we stand at the brink of the greatest technological revolution in human history. But we're being dragged away from it by Big Money's push for a technology with fifty years of proven ecological disaster and financial failure. Green energy is poised to remake our world. Wind power is the cheapest form of new generation now available. There are sufficient wind resources between the Mississippi and the Rockies to generate, with available technology, 300% of the electricity we use. There's enough in North Dakota, Kansas and Texas alone to do 100%. Solar technologies ranging from green architectural design to desert power towers to photovoltaic cells that go on every rooftop are booming toward a multi-billion-dollar mainstay of our electric supply. Bio-fuels based on sustainable, organic practices can transform our transportation sector. Tidal, wave, geothermal, ocean thermal and a wide range of other green production processes stand at the brink of epic profitability. Meanwhile, increased efficiency and revived mass transit are the cheapest, cleanest ways to salvage the energy we waste. In concert, these <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0975340247/counterpunchmaga>revolutionary green technologies are poised to bring us to Solartopia, a post-pollution planet powered totally by energy harvested in harmony with our Mother Earth. They promise an abundance of efficient supply with the power to boom our economies and save our ability to survive on this planet. But here's the hitch: renewable energy has the "flaw" of tending toward community control. In the long run, a true Solartopian revolution must involve re-shaping our corporate culture into one based on sustainability, accountability and grassroots democracy. Though some astute corporations are cashing in, in the long run green technologies are the door to decentralizationand economic democracy. A green-powered Solartopia will own its energy supply at the grassroots. Wind, solar, bio-fuels-they hold the keys to community control. Against all that, new nukes are the ultimate weapon of mass distraction. There have been numerous rationales put forth for building more reactors. Except to an entrenched corporate power elite, none of them make any sense. Some advocates claim new reactors can fight global warming. In fact, through their own "normal" emissions, in the construction process, in mining, milling and enriching fuel, in decommissioning, in managing radioactive waste, in accounting for inevitable catastrophic accidents and terror attacks, in weapons proliferation, and much much more, atomic reactors are a global warming nightmare. Some also claim nukes will generate cheap electricity. But fifty years of proven failure (the first commercial reactor opened at Shippingport, Pennsylvania in 1957) says exactly the opposite. Overall, the nuke power experiment has been a trillion dollar disaster, with explosions, melt-downs, cost overruns, expensive failures, massive subsidies, undoable insurance, deregulatory bailouts and much more on the debit sheet. Overall, at its ultimate corporate root, the new nuke push is a coup d'etat, a rightist putsch to prevent the community ownership of our Solartopian energy supply. The irony in California could not be more obvious. The only way the industry can build new nukes is for the community to NOT require a solution to the radioactive waste problem. The world was told fifty years ago that such a solution was "just around the corner." It was also told atomic energy would be "too cheap to meter." These two biggest of all 20th Century industrial lies are about to be rationalized and atomized by a corporate King CONG desperate to hold power. But the vision of Solartopia burns bright and real. Humankind now possesses all the technology we need to solve global warming and bring us a world of post-pollution prosperity. The new nuke surge just declared in California is an early test in the larger war for a sustainable future. The question about to be asked in California, and worldwide, is: Do we have the will to win Solartopia for ourselves and our children? *Harvey Wasserman* helped co-ordinate media for the Clamshell Alliance, 1976-8. He was arrested at Diablo Canyon in 1984 and at Seabrook in 1989. He is author of "Solartopia: Our Green-Powered Earth, A.D. 2030, <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0975340247/counterpunchmaga>" He can be reached at: Windhw(a)aol.com <mailto:Windhw@aol.com> -- "The past is the Textbook of Tyrants; the Future the Bible of the Free" - Herman Melville

2 1