Celebration of Ben Franklin– A Visionary 200 Years Ahead Of His Time

by
Benjamin Franklin 1767

Benjamin Franklin 1767 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

In recognition of the 223rd anniversary of Ben Franklin’s death, we here at LGBG feel that it is important to remember and salute this visionary and his accomplishments, particularly those relative to the green movement.

 

Ben Franklin was born on January 17, 1706 in Boston, Massachusetts and died on April 17, 1790 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  Franklin was a printer by trade and a scientist, a librarian, inventor and statesman.  He was internationally renown for his work to harness electricity with the invention of the lightning rod.  His values were consistent with the green movement in that he espoused thrift, hard work and education.

 

In addition to inventions of the Franklin stove, bifocal glasses and a flexible urinary catheter, Ben Franklin also was a social innovator.  He is credited with the “pay it forward policy whereby an individual in receipt of a good deed repays the assistance by doing something good for someone other than his/her benefactor.  This practice has evolved into an international movement of random acts of kindness.

 

Ben Franklin was a man ahead of his time and a proponent of green living and sustainability, as evidenced by his influence on the then emerging science of population study and demographics.  He was an astute observer of population growth trends, both in the United States, as well as in Europe.  He acknowledged the importance of maintaining an adequate food supply to accommodate the fast-growing U.S. population.  Out of concern for economic development and the reliance on the shipping industry for transportation of goods and people, Franklin studied the currents in the Atlantic Ocean, and gulf stream charts and made recommendations on navigation currents so as to control sailing time to various destinations.  He is best known, perhaps, for his work with electricity, and he also delved into research on refrigeration and evaporation.

 

At an early age, Ben Franklin adopted a set of virtues which he used to guide his life.  Several of these virtues are consistent with the tenets of the green movement and sustainable living.

 

1.  “Temperance.  Eat not to dullness; drink not to elevation.”
2.  “Order.  Let all your things have places.”
3.  “Resolution.  Resolve to perform what you ought.”
4.  “Frugality.  Waste nothing.”
5.  “Moderation.  Avoid extremes.”
6.  “Cleanliness.  Tolerate no uncleanliness.”
7.  “Humility.”

 

Benjamin Franklin was a visionary, who fully appreciated the gift of this earth and lived his entire life dedicated to healthy living, industry and the protection and progression of mankind.  His accomplishments cannot be understated, and our current Earth Day celebration would be lacking without the observance of this great man.  He was a true  example of what it means to live green, be green.

 

_______________

 

Sources for this article:
1.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin.
2.  http://www.ealmanac.com/2974/numbers/the-thirteen-virtues-of-benjamin-franklin/.

 

Artificial Trees– Clear Indication that God Is Great, Beer Is Good, And People Are Crazy

by
#GeoEngineering - more prevalent than u know

#GeoEngineering – more prevalent than u know (Photo credit: joykennelly)

In the wake of the realization that climate change is a reality, a geoengineering technology incorporating the use of artificial trees to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is a clear indication that “God is great, beer is good, and people are crazy”.  Geoengineering is defined as “climate engineering, climate remediation, and climate intervention” .(1)  Geoengineering has been used primarily to refer to “the deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth’s climate system, in order to moderate global warming“.  It typically involves efforts to rid the atmosphere of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide and solar radiation management techniques to “offset effects of increased greenhouse gas concentration by causing the Earth to absorb less solar radiation“. (2)

It has been noted that scientists at Columbia University’s Earth Institute are working on a “carbon capture” project, which involves the use of a prototype of artificial trees that will remove carbon dioxide from the air “faster and at higher levels than natural photosynthesis can accomplish”. (3)  This group postulates that the captured carbon dioxide then can be released by a “gentle flow of water” and then can be used industrially or safely sequestered underground.  Many environmentalists take an exception to technological fixes for global warming, such as these because such actions “discourage us from the hard work of actually cutting down on greenhouse emissions”.  The main consideration here is whether the goal here is climate manipulation or solutions to address climate change.

The reality here is that trees are not the culprits in this scenario.  They consistently have done their job well.  They effectively reflect the “greatness of God“.  It is man who has disrupted this process by actions that increase our carbon footprint, namely pollution of land, air and water, reliance on fossil fuels, and to a large extent, deforestation.  Consideration of ethics and moral responsibility is a very valid approach to this issue.  Followers of the green movement recognize themselves as “stewards” of the Earth.  We have a duty to protect the environment and to pass on a healthy world to future generations.  This notion of benevolent management of the world has a foundation in religion, ethics and morality and must not be diminished by greed, politics or sheer lack of responsibility.

Now on to the role of beer (which is good) and its relationship to the idea of artificial trees, in particular, and geoengineering, in general.  So many of us are caught up in a rat race.  You have to admit that when you take a break with an ice-cold beer, the stress level goes down and you can reflect on life.  Now you can appreciate a tree as opposed to the stressful periods when you “couldn’t see the forest for the trees”.  Things start to make sense.  You realize that so many things about life have become artificial, and maybe we should stop this nonsense.

Finally, the acceptance of artificial trees clearly would indicate that people are crazy.  By definition, artificial means “humanly contrived, often on a natural model, manmade, simulated; sham”  Already we rely on so many artificial products and ingredients which ultimately bear heavy costs in terms of money, waste, and adverse health consequences.  Now trees?  To this notion, we must say a resounding NO.  We can grow trees with seeds made by trees.  We do not need to manufacture them artificially.

We can address climate change by a consolidated effort to avoid pollution, recycling, reducing our fuel and energy consumption and living responsibly.  We do not want climate manipulation.  Rather, we demand climate change solutions.  We want to live green, be green.

Sources for this article:

1.  United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) (July 2011) (PDF). Climate Engineering: Technical Status, Future Directions, and Potential Responses (Report). Center for Science, Technology, and Engineering. p. 3. Retrieved 2011-12-01.

2.  Royal Society (September 2009) (PDF). Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and Uncertainty (Report). p. 1. ISBN 978-0-85403-773-5. Retrieved 2011-12-01.

3.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-schiffman/artificial-trees-carbon-capture_b_2728083.html.

4.  Credit to Bill Currington from song “People Are Crazy”.

Related articles

How To Keep The Power On When Your Utility Company Fails

by
P1304138.jpg

P1304138.jpg (Photo credit: Sigfrid Lundberg)

The reality of climate change, combined with global warming and deterioration of infrastructures, has resulted in numerous power failures in many areas of the country, and now is the time for each of us to accept the responsibility of maintaining power in our homes when our utility companies fail to maintain the flow of electricity during extreme weather occurrences.  The need to take matters into our own hands is more urgent than ever as we now witness the task of finding solutions to climate change being undertaken by our politically divided Congress.  We can assume that major upgrades of power grids will happen one day, hopefully before a complete irreparable power failure ensues.   Meanwhile, on a more frequent basis, we are forced to endure days or hours without electricity during winter and summer storms or during excessively hot days when the present power grids face an undue burden.

A little research shows that there are remedies to ensure house power when the utility companies fail, some more costly than others, but solutions, nonetheless.  We will take a look at few of these.

  • Gas generators.  Most of us are familiar with gas generators that can be purchased for as little as $299, especially if bought during non-emergency periods.  The simplest generators operate off of gas.  Cheaper models can support a few lights and perhaps a fan or electric heater  and a refrigerator during power failures, but not much more.  These generators tend to be very noisy.  However, the biggest issue is that they MUST be placed in an open area to prevent carbon monoxide buildup and exposure, which can be fatal.  In times of power outages, gas generators do help us have access to some power in our homes.
  • Backup generators.  A more sophisticated generator is the backup version which is wired into a gas or propane line.  Depending on the size, these products can keep the lights on in the entire house, preserve refrigerator function to prevent food spoilage, maintain power supply to heating and cooling systems and keep sump pumps and well pumps in operation.  These systems have built-in battery chargers to guarantee battery operation and feature automatic transfer switches between utility power and generator power.  Backup generators are available for purchase or for lease.
  • Solar panels.  As President Obama noted in the State of the Union Address this week, the cost of solar energy is getting cheaper.  As solar energy becomes a more mainstream option, there now are many financing, leasing and equipment options available.  Cost can run from about $1500 to more than $10,000.  When we hear the term solar energy, we immediately think about “photo-voltaic panels,” but there are other sola products available.  They include ground solar panels or grid-tied solar energy systems with a battery backup.  The latter option is very expensive, but it may be a worthwhile investment, particularly in areas of the country that are forced to endure repeated extended periods without power.  Another option is small portable emergency solar power systems that can be used to operate a few small appliances but is inadequate for large appliances, furnaces or cooling systems.  A review of other available products indicate other options, including stand alone systems, remote power systems and emergency power systems.  Solar energy systems often include a bonus of energy tax credits, thereby making them even more attractive.

Considering that the storm season is approaching and that it is more than reasonable to expect as many or more power outages than we have previously experienced during the past summer seasons, it is important that we take charge of the responsibility of keeping our electricity running when the local power grid fails.  We must continue to hold our elective officials, federal, state and local, responsible for enacting policies to protect the environment and to make it a priority to upgrade deteriorating infrastructures and power grids.  Also, we must communicate with utility companies and demand to be included in the conversation on the power needs of our communities.  Lastly, we must continue to rally and speak up for the environment, the need to reduce our carbon footprint, protect our waters and to accept the reality of climate change based on hard scientific facts.  We must continue to fight to live green, be green.

Sources:

http://home.howstuffworks.com/home-improvement/household-safety/security/emergency-power.htm

http://www.getsolar.com/residential_Solar-Roof-vs-Ground-Installation.php

http://energy.gov/energysaver/articles/tips-renewable-energy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-r-fink/solar-electric-backup-for_b_1696535.html

 

Sustainable Energy Movement Belies Climate Change Critics

by
Scientific studies on climate helped establish...

Scientific studies on climate helped establish a consensus. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As the debate over the reality of climate change rages on in Congress and in the news, the details of a promising series of events are emerging that belie the arguments of climate change critics, who deny the existence of climate change and the negative consequences of inaction to address global warming.

Objective data now available clearly indicates a steady movement towards sustainability practices by many businesses.  For instance, recent statistics show that there has been a major shift away from the use of coal and towards natural gas to generate electricity in America.  This shift is documented by a major decline in coal transported by railroads.  This trend is concerning to railroads because coal is the most important commodity for them, accounting for 43.3 percent of  freight railway tonnage and 24.6 percent of gross rail revenue in 2011.  It is important to note that the decline in coal transport by rail, for the most part, is directly attributable to electric utilities’ needs “to take advantage of more price-competitive natural gas“.  While the production of natural gas does pose issues, particularly with fracking, it is a cleaner source of fuel, releasing fewer global-warming gases, such as carbon dioxide, thereby resulting in a reduction of greenhouse emissions in America.  As scientists work to make the fracking procedure safer, natural gas definitely competes against coal as a preferred fuel source.

A look at events going on in Alaska also provides evidence of belief in climate change, a willingness of people to accept its existence and the need to protect the environment.  A recent story chronicles Sarah Palin‘s efforts to address the issues of climate change while she was governor of Alaska.  Palin’s recognition of global warming and its effect on her state and its citizens led her to establish a climate change sub-cabinet to produce ideas on “how Alaskans can save energy and reduce greenhouse emissions”.  During this period prior to her interest in higher political aspirations, Palin was dedicated to find solutions to “protect Alaska’s most at-risk communities“.  Now fast forward to today where we find that current Alaska Republican governor, Sean Parnell (previously a lobbyist for oil companies) has quietly dismantled Palin’s Immediate Action Workgroup.  As a result, it is noted that there are 12 small indigenous communities on Alaska’s coast that need to relocate because of global warming.  Currently in Alaska, the voices are getting louder in support of these displaced communities and in recognition of the reality of global warming and climate change.

A third interesting series of events pointing to acceptance of global warming and the need to seek alternative energy solutions can be seen in the NFL’s increased use of solar energy for stadiums.  Of course, we just witnesses the major power failure at Super Bowl XLVII in New Orleans, Louisiana.  While it may come as a surprise to some people, for the past 18 years the NFL has been pursuing green energy solutions.  It recognized long ago that the sheer  size of most NFL venues were outpacing the infrastructures, thereby taxing the electrical grids and at some point resulting in power failures.  To date, several NFL stadiums are equipped with solar panels, including Gillette Stadium (New England Patriots), MetLife Stadium (NY Jets and NY Giants), FedEx Field (Redskins), and Century Link Field (Seattle Mariners).  The company responsible for most of these projects is NRG Solar Company (www.nrgsolar.com).  These efforts clearly are indicative of the NFL’s recognition of the importance of solar energy and the role it can play in business today, particularly for industries with very large energy burdens at any particular time.

We here at LGBG feel empowered by the efforts of individuals, businesses and organizations who refuse to be deterred in their efforts to seek solutions to global warming.  We know that climate change is a reality.  As we enter the weekend, we are posed to witness another reminder of the reality of climate change and global warming by two huge storms coming from the west and the south and expected to result in a major blizzard in the Northeast, which still has not recovered from Sandy.  We wish the best for everyone in the path of these storms.  They truly are Mother Nature reminding us to live green, be green.

Sources for this Article:
1.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rhone-resch/nfl-solar-power_b_2592901.html
2.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/06/sarah-palin-climate-change_n_2630262.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green
3.  http://www.climatecentral.org/news/new-rail-traffic-data-reflects-big-shift-away-from-coal-15555

The New Year Ushers in New Green Laws

by
Bill Daniels getting chicken feed from the fee...

Bill Daniels getting chicken feed from the feed bags which he must store in one of his three rooms. Panther Red Ash… – NARA – 540999 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The New Year ushered in new legislation in many states, including some “green laws” that we find worthy of comment today.

The state of Maryland enacted a new law that prohibits the use of chicken feed that contains arsenic, a known carcinogen.  This is the first law of its kind in this nation, which bans the use of arsenic-containing additives, specifically roxarsone, in chicken feed.  The bill to prohibit arsenic-containing chemicals in chicken feed was sponsored by Del. Tom Hucker (D-Dist 20) of Silver Spring.   Del. Hucker notes that this new law is “a win for all Marylanders.”  Historically, arsenic-containing additives were added to chicken feed to protect the birds from parasites.  However, this chemical can build up in the birds’ bodies and manure and then can be washed into the Chesapeake Bay.  it is important to note that arsenic has been linked with diabetes, heart disease and cancer.  This win comes with a caveat as the poultry industry expresses concern that roxarsone (previously manufactured by Pfizer and voluntarily suspended in 2011) could be marketed again as a similar product by a different company.  It is important that we watch for any new developments that may occur in response to this new legislation.

A second piece of legislation worthy of mention is New York’s new law that exempts the sale and installation of commercial  solar energy system equipment from state sales use tax.  This law was enacted in response to the state’s commitment to “achieve the goal of 45 percent of New York State’s electricity needs through clean renewable energy and improved energy efficiency by 2015.”  Sen. George Maziarz (R-C, Newfane) Chairman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Telecommunications, notes that eliminating all state sales tax on solar systems equipment and installations and providing local municipalities the option to do the same should serve to stimulate the economy with increased commercial solar installations and the creation of more jobs to complete the work.  This law definitely should serve as a model for other states to increase the use of clean renewable energy while simultaneously stimulating the job market.

energy

energy (Photo credit: Sean MacEntee)

Our third selection of legislation to discuss can be found in the state of Iowa, which enacted a new law that allows the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to permit anglers to fish with three poles and a total of six hooks for an additional $12 licensing fee.  This law is aimed to spur ice fishing which is trying to rebound after a poor showing last winter.  Additionally, the Iowa DNR passed a new law that makes licensing more convenient by permitting hunting and fishing on a combined license.  The goal of these laws are to promote more outside activity, which definitely is green.

There are so many things we can do to protect the environment and promote healthy living.  Today we at LGBG salute the states of Maryland, New York and Iowa for the steps they have taken to protect the environment and to help us all live green, be green.

English: Iowa Department of Natural Resources logo

English: Iowa Department of Natural Resources logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Sources for this article:

http://www.gazette.net/article/20121231/NEWS/712319987/1122/bethesda/New-Maryland-laws-target-veterans’-licenses-chicken-feed-elections&template=gazette

http://bellmore.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/laws-taking-effect-on-jan-1-2013#

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/viewart/20130101/NEWS10/301010068/Updated-5-new-laws-new-year-take-effect-Iowa

Happy Green New Year

by

This year has soared by, and we would like to thank all of our friends, old and new and our followers and co-bloggers for your support for our group and for your commitment to the green movement.  We wish you all a Happy New Year.

As we move forward to a new year, we know that it is important that we renew our commitment to protect the environment and the green movement so that we can live green and healthy lives.  As we face the fiscal cliff, we are aware of the uncertainty of the continuation of some of the successes that we have already achieved.  There is a chance that we may lose some gains in the area of alternative energy (wind and solar energy) , and we may see decreased financial support for our national parks and forests.  However, we will not be deterred.  We will start the new year out maintaining our personal commitment to live green by continuing our routine habits of recycling, living healthier, eating healthy diets, supporting local eateries and local farmers, and taking all the steps we can to reduce our carbon footprint.

We also must remain mindful of the eco-cliff.  As bad as financial debt is, environmental debt is worse.  Our legacy to our children must take into consideration the state of the environment.  There is no value in a country with a balanced budget but with polluted air, depleted natural resources and lack of fresh water.  Failure to deal with the looming eco-cliff will hurt the U.S. economy, plus the lives of billions of people around the world.  In this new year, we must keep environmental issues in the forefront of discussion, policy and legislation.

During the next year, we would like to focus more on policies and legislation regarding green issues.  Our goal here is to keep you abreast of pending legislation in different jurisdictions on issues important to the green movement.  We would like to bring notice to our representatives in Congress who support green initiatives, as well as those who consistently thwart our efforts.  This past election year proved costly to “flat earthers” and others who doubted or totally denied the existence of climate change and its impact on global warming.  We owe our thanks especially to the efforts of the League of Conservation Voters and Momsrising.org for their tenacity and relentless determination to bring climate change doubters to task and block their reelection.  We must continue with this effort, and LGBG wants to concentrate time and effort into lobbying our Congress and local public officials in this regard.

We here at LGBG are excited and energized about our work for the new year.  We will continue to research and learn, share and educate and do all that we can to protect our environment so that we all can live green, be green.

Source for this article:

http://ecopreneurist.com/2012/12/29/the-eco-cliff-and-the-fiscal-cliff/

Fiscal-Cliff-1

Credit :  Ecopreneurist

The Fiscal Cliff & Our Environment

by

Much has been made of the potential sequester the U.S. faces this New Years’ Eve, which the masses have affectionately labeled the “fiscal cliff.”  Well, with the possibility of large impacts to the average person and small business, rightly so.  However, what has not been rightly emphasized, in our opinion, is the potentially devastating effects this cliff could have on our nation’s environmental sector.  The cliff would lead to higher taxes and governmental budget cuts in the defense department, yes.  But what is less well-known is that the governmental cuts will also most likely include environmental victims.

For one, the energy industry could be significantly hurt, both at governmental and private sector levels.  Solar energy contractors who rely on receiving current 1603 cash grants for installation projects will not see those cash grants should the US see the cliff.  This could strongly hinder the financing of solar energy projects, depleting a relatively small but significant portion of the necessary cash for such projects.

Moreover, the cliff would trigger a $148 million retraction of funds from the US Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy program.  To help put this into perspective, this loss is the equivalent of cutting the US Department of Energy’s solar energy program completely in half.  These cuts to agencies like the Department of Energy threaten not only a decrease in energy development, but also a decrease in energy usage, as programs would lose funding for research and loans used now for innovation projects.  The future would be increasingly questionable.

A second instance would have harmful effects for the US National Parks, National Forests, wildlife refuges, and other public lands.  For instance, the 258,000 jobs scattered among US National Parks and the 35,000 jobs among wildlife refuges could be jeopardized by the expected cuts in science and law enforcement positions at these establishments.  Similarly, the 2 million plus jobs within the Bureau of Land Management, which oversees the US National Forests could also find themselves in limbo, as awaited budget cuts loom large.  The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, which employs 66 million scientists, educators, researchers, and technicians, among others, could see devastating effects, as well.

As the list goes on, the bottom line remains ever evident.  In cutting governmental agencies’ budgets, the environmental agencies will surely be among those who see drastic cuts.  Further, those cuts could prove disastrous, and at the very least, detrimental to the US’s management, protection, and research of the environment.  There are millions of jobs at risk, in addition to the health and lives of the organisms living among the zones over which these agencies keep watch.

Overall, based on the observations and predictions surrounding the seemingly imminent sequester our government currently wrestles, there could be hampering effects on government agencies who will see severe cuts, US citizens who will see layoffs, and wildlife who will see the harmful effects of increased neglect.  So God Speed to our government representatives, in hopes that their efforts add up to a reasonable solution that can avoid harmful cuts to the essential beings of such agencies, people, and wildlife.

[polldaddy poll=6799106]

Sources for More Reading:
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/guest-post-what-would-the-fiscal-cliff-mean-for-the-u.s.-solar-market
http://www.governing.com/news/state/gov-fiscal-cliff-full-coverage.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/eco-nomics/2012/11/15/the-fiscal-cliff-and-the-environment/
http://blog.cleanwateraction.org/2012/12/06/dont-let-the-fiscal-cliff-devastate-our-environment/

College Students Call For Endowment Divestment in Fossil Fuels

by
Bill McKibben, by Jennifer Esperanza

Bill McKibben, by Jennifer Esperanza (Photo credit: 350.org)

Over the past few weeks, college students on several companies have demanded that university endowment funds sell off coal, oil and gas stocks.  This growing movement is spurred by the recognition by students that climate change is an urgent issue that needs to be a priority on the national agenda.  Many of the students have connected with Bill McKibben of 350.org, an advocacy group for carbon reduction.  McKibben has been traveling the country visiting campuses and educating students on the subject of climate change and global warming.

I find this idea for this movement interesting and refreshing, especially in light of comments made in response to a recent blog entitled “Exxon Hates Your Children– Fact, Fiction or Propaganda” in which one responder pointed out the need to get the attention and involvement of shareholders invested in fossil fuel companies in order to find solutions to cleaner energy as opposed to trying to use tactics of consumer boycotts to force change.

While this movement has witnessed some success at some smaller institutions, namely Unity College in Maine, which voted to get out of investments in fossil fuels and at Hampshire College in Massachusetts, which has modified its investment policy in regards to fossil fuels, several of the larger colleges and universities are not budging.  In fact, “no school with an endowment exceeding $1 billion has agreed to divest itself of fossil fuel stocks”.  Harvard University has stated that it is not considering divesting from companies related to fossil fuels, despite the support of 72% of the undergraduate student body’s recent vote supporting such a measure.

It will be interesting to see the progression of this movement.  With climate change becoming a major issue and with the public demanding action on alternative energy sources, it is likely that colleges and universities will be forced to reexamine their policies and fall in line.  Interestingly, this movement is seen as an imitation of the successful effort of the 1980s whereby colleges, universities an businesses were successfully pressured to rid themselves of investments in companies doing business under apartheid South Africa.

The green movement is growing everyday, and as the young people, who are the future stewards of this planet get on board, we all can definitely expect to see a day where we all live green, be green.

Sources for Article:

  1.  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/05/business/energy-environment/to-fight-climate-change-college-students-take-aim-at-the-endowment-portfolio.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&hpw&
  2. http://livegreenbegreen.com/2012/12/06/exxon-hates-your-children-fact-fiction-or-propaganda/

“Exxon Hates Your Children”– Fact, Fiction or Propaganda

by

The recent ad launched by opponents of the fossil fuel industry declaring “Exxon Hates Your Children” is disturbing, provocative and unsettling.  Two advocacy groups, Oil Change International and The Other 98%, launched the controversial ad on its website on Wednesday in an effort to cajole Congress to “eliminate fossil fuel subsidies amid fiscal cliff negotiations”.   The ad portrays an actor posing as a representative of Exxon, stating, “We all know the climate crisis will rip [your children’s] world apart, but we don’t care because it will make us rich”.  The targeted markets for this advertising campaign includes the very same areas where the American Petroleum Institute is running ads arguing that “[m]ore energy development produces more jobs, revenue and energy.  More taxes produce less of all three”.

This ad war comes on the heels of the budget crisis and looming fiscal cliff.  Proponents of climate change face the possible elimination of wind energy tax credits amid the arguments of conservatives voicing objection to the 2% subsidy by the federal government.  If not extended the PTC credit will expire.  Conversely, opponents of the fossil fuel industry voice objections to not only the huge subsidies received by oil companies, but also to their business model, which requires continuous drilling for oil, which is proven to be responsible for climate disruption.  They cry foul also because in the last year alone, renewable energy, though recognized as important for a healthy environment, received six times less support worldwide than fuel subsidies.

While the declaration that “Exxon Hates Your Children” grabs the attention, it is propaganda.  We all know or should know that Exxon and all major corporations exist at the will of the people.  As long as Exxon (the current poster child for the fossil fuel industry)  has a viable market, it will be around, doing what it does–  drilling and manufacturing oil for oil-hungry consumers.  Exxon does not hate children.  Rather, it loves money, and in its quest to make the money it loves so much, it harms the environment.  Perhaps the best analogy for this scenario can be found in the circumstances surrounding Timothy McVeigh‘s bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City.  It was not McVeigh’s intent to kill the children in the nursery in the federal building.  Rather, they were “collateral damage” in his quest.

Currently, the earth and its inhabitants all are the “collateral damage” of the fossil fuel industry.  However, we do have a choice.  Let’s strive to reduce our carbon footprint and reliance on fossil fuels.  We can start at home by conserving energy, reducing our use of water and electricity, recycling and using energy-efficient products.  Moreover, we can make sure we are heard by our representatives, who serve at our will.  Demand that they vote green or be voted out of office.  Let’s fight to live green, be green!

Sources for article:

  1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/05/exxon-hates-your-children_n_2246481.html
  2. http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/reflections-on-mcveigh.html
Exxon

Exxon (Photo credit: Tom Haymes)

PTC Stirs Evil Wind Debate

by

In a statement released earlier this week, a bipartisan group of legislators from both the Senate and House of Representatives warned that the expiration of the wind protection tax credit (PTC) would result in the loss of a substantial number of manufacturing and construction jobs, thus triggering a great debate on the relevance of this credit and the efficacy of wind energy.  The PTC “subsidizes new wind generation by 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour of wind electricity produced”.  If this credit is not renewed by Congress, it will expire at the end of the year.  The impact of the threat of expiration of this credit already is being felt as wind companies are pushing back projects and laying off workers because of the looming uncertainty of federal funding.

After reading articles and blogs on this subject, I could not help but notice some of the comments made by other readers, many of which were constructive, but others, concerning.  I use the term “concerning” because I see that in most debates or discussions regarding green initiatives, education and understanding of the issues, or the lack of such, clearly guides the dialogue on these topics.

Living green and understanding the need to effect environmental change requires education.  Research and development and technological advancement enable scientists to find solutions to cleaner and efficient energy.  This definitely comes at a cost, albeit a worthwhile expense.  The push to advance science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in schools today recognizes the benefits of providing opportunities for students to explore new ideas and new worlds related to science.  Education programs, such as STEM, provide a bridge from the old to the new and are so important because they enhance vision, which is a key ingredient in the success of any scientific venture.

Unfortunately, there are many diehards in this country, who are resistant to change, even if it is for the good of people and the environment.  The green movement should not and cannot be dragged down by resistance to change, and modern technological solutions to energy problems should be welcomed, especially in the face of scientific evidence of looming catastrophes relative to climate change directly attributed to human behavior.  This negative mindset is not new in America as history gives us many instances of innovative ideas that prevailed but were met with great resistance.  An immediate example that comes to mind is the case of Henry Ford, who was successful in mass marketing the gas engine automobile in a time when many Americans would have settled for “faster horses“.  In the same spirit of Henry Ford, the green movement must promote efficient wind energy solutions as the future of our nation rather than “clean oil” solutions as suggested by some people.

Another major issue with detractors of wind power, who would be happy to see the credit expire, surrounds the willingness to destroy the job market.  Job creation is crucial to the recovery of the economy, and the market in wind energy projects presents the opportunity to add jobs.  This is especially good for veterans because “work in wind energy offers vets the opportunity to use a wide variety of skills they learned in the military, such as risk analyses, problem-solving and contract negotiation. . .”  So many of us voice our appreciation for the sacrifices of veterans and their families to protect us, and the promotion of wind energy projects through the PTC presents opportunities to reward returning soldiers with jobs, rather than just handshakes and pats on the back for their service.

Another potential base of support which needs to be tapped for wind energy advancement in this country is couples with young children or who are planning to have children.  Today’s energy solutions will frame your children’s tomorrow.  Living green should be the top priority on your agenda so that you can ensure a safe and healthy environment for your children.  Issues of renewable energy, such as wind power should become routine in articles in parenting magazines and blogs designed to educate families on living healthy.

The time is running short to extend the PTC.  As Congress haggles over the many issues dangling on the fiscal cliff, it is urgent that supporters of the green movement band together and speak up to protect the PTC so as to ensure the advancement of wind power as a viable source of energy in America.  We cannot allow the defeat of innovation technology such as this that enables us to live green, be green.

Sources for this article:

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_21990652/four-governors-including-hickenlooper-urge-renewal-wind-power-credit

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/11/30/us-veterans-fight-for-wind-jobs-as-tax-credit-hits-the-cliff/

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/08/henry_ford_never_said_the_fast.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/wind-tax-credit-fiscal-cliff_n_2207581.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green

Wind Energy

Wind Energy (Photo credit: janie.hernandez55)