Green Blogger Needed
| Solar power plant Portugal to receive a $75M solar plant courtesy of GE. |
| Green Home Design - Free! FreeGreen - Suburban LoftI’m an Architect. About half of my practice is designing homes, however things are about to change.FreeGreen is a new online design firm that has a unique Web 2.0+ approach to their service. They provide free home designs. I just downloaded construction documents for two of their homes and [.] |
| Sun screens reduce summer heat Sun Screens block up to 90% of the sun’s harmful UV rays and reduce temperatures in rooms by as much as 20 degrees. |
| Green Blogger Needed EnergyRefuge.com is looking for a green blogger- someone with a passion for the environment and alternative energy. |
| Good News and Bad News at the Beijing Auto Show Great Wall “Wizard” Electric Vehicle First the good news:Great Wall Motors, a Chinese automaker that specializes in making light pickups and utility vehicles, will display two electric cars and a hybrid vehicles at the 2008 Beijing Auto Show.According to the Xinhua news agency, Great Wall will unveil a tiny two-seat EV called the Kulla, or [.] |
| Solar Power coming for PG&E Customers in California As the nation’s number one distributed solar utility, PG&E supports solar energy in a number of ways. |
| Mayor Hickenlooper on Colorado Matters Mayor Hickenlooper is a guest on today’s episode of Colorado Matters - a daily production of Colorado Public Radio. With host Ryan Warner, he discusses details of the Greenprint Denver Advisory Council’s recommendations, shares his thoughts about the proposals, and examines next steps. Listen live this evening at 7 p.m. on KCFR 1340 AM, or [.] |
| Ten Senators to Watch on Global Warming The Senate is scheduled to debate and vote on landmark global warming legislation during the first week of June.Will the Senate seize this historic opportunity and begin to solve the global warming crisis?These ten Senators reflect the debate that’s playing out right now.Some are swing votes. Others are leaders whose management skills will be put to the test.Their work with Senate colleagues over the next month could make the difference in our efforts to pass meaningful global warming legislation this year.  Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) – Has introduced legislation in the past that would limit global warming pollution from power plants; as a member of the Senate Republican leadership the question will be - does he help the Republican caucus move to a more responsible position?  Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) – A moderate Democrat with good environmental ratings from the League of Conservation Voters; represents state with one of the largest per-capita manufacturing industries in the country; he will look to balance economic and manufacturing interests in the bill.  Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) – Chair of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee; has his own competing global warming legislation with Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA); is looked to by many moderate Democrats, particularly those with coal mining interests, as a leader on issue.  Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) – Senior Senator from South Carolina, a state vulnerable to hurricanes and coastal flooding; is one of Senator John McCain’s strongest allies in the Senate; supports nuclear power and will try to boost support for nuclear energy in the bill.  Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) – Freshman Senator from a state that is a traditional political bellwether for the country; has said that global warming is a serious threat and has promoted investments in alternative energy; her senior Senator, Kit Bond, is one of the Senate leading opponents against action to reduce global warming emissions; will look for ways to best balance her state’s rural and low-income interests in the bill.  Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) – As Senate Majority Leader, he has scheduled floor time in early June to debate the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act; his leadership will be critical in bridging the differences between members.  Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) – First-term Senator from a state vulnerable to droughts and wildfires that could be made far worse by global warming; Colorado has abundant solar and wind energy resources, but also large coal and other fossil fuel reserves; Salazar has praised Colorado Governor Bill Ritter’s Climate Action Plan, which adopts aggressive greenhouse reduction goals; will be looking at various technology incentives and opportunities for agriculture in the bill to make sure that they work for Colorado.  Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR) – Second-term Senator from a state renowned for its natural beauty and diverse geography; Oregon is part of the Western Climate Initiative to establish a regional approach to reducing global warming pollution; he continues to question the science behind global warming. Will he decide to represent the citizens of his state and join the call for real action?  Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) – Fifth-term moderate Republican Senator from a political swing state with manufacturing and coal interests; has his own global warming legislation with Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM); if Senator Bingaman and Senator Specter will both work with constructively with Senators Lieberman and Warner on key areas of interest, it will send a strong signal to other undecided votes.  Senator John Sununu (R-NH) – First-term Senator from a state with big outdoor recreation and skiing industries that could be vulnerable to global warming; in 2005, New Hampshire joined the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative of nine Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states to limit global warming pollution; while Senator Sununu has supported a bill that would limit emissions from powerplants, he voted no on a comprehensive cap-and-trade bill in 2003; despite strong support for addressing climate change in the state, he has yet to endorse the Climate Security Act. Take Action »Forward this list »Leave a Comment » |
| Press Release: AB 32 and Other Environmental Protection Measures Must Stay on Track
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Derek Walker, 916) 492-7169, dbwalker@edf.org Jesus Mena, 415-293-6097, jemena@edf.org (Sacramento – April 30, 2008) The legislature and the Governor must soundly reject a proposal to roll back environmental protections to address the state’s budget woes and continue their joint efforts to improve and protect California’s air quality, water quality and natural resources.
Environmental Defense Fund joined other groups in opposing the proposal put forth on Tuesday by a minority of Republicans and business leaders that urged delaying implementation of AB 32, the greenhouse gas reduction law adopted in 2006, because of budget constraints.
“Study after study has shown that the cost of inaction will be devastating to the economy and will set up our children and grandchildren for disaster,” said Derek Walker, acting director of the Environmental Defense Fund state climate campaign. “The public has said time and again that it wants California to continue its environmental leadership. A wide range of business leaders support bold action on global warming because they understand it will be a win-win for the economy and the environment.”
The proposal reflects a thorough misunderstanding of the impact of pollution and regulation in this state. Responsible assessments both by independent analysts and regulators in recent years have shown that the state’s air pollution costs its residents and businesses tens of billions of dollars each year in lost productivity, lost days at work, health costs and lost days at school. This doesn’t even take into account the human suffering. These costs were far higher than the costs of regulation.
“The world is watching. We cannot afford to wait, we cannot fail,” Walker said.
###
About Environmental Defense Fund
A leading national nonprofit organization, Environmental Defense Fund represents more than 500,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense Fund has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. For more information, visit www.edf.org.
|
| Hybrid cars break even The auto web site, Edmunds.com, is now saying that some hybrid cars are worth their premium price tag due to higher gas costs and tax credits from the government. |
| Solar panel jacket This has got to be the coolest solar jacket available! Solar powered jackets from ScotteVest.com are straight from the future. |
| Press Release: Analysis Shows Effective Action on Climate Change Will Have Little Impact on U.S. Economy FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEContact: Tony Kreindler, EDF, 202-572-3378 or 202-210-5791 (cell)(Washington – April 28, 2008) A groundbreaking new study released today by Environmental Defense Fund finds a clear consensus among leading economic models that a cap-and-trade policy to cut global warming pollution is consistent with long-term economic growth. The anticipated cost of reducing greenhouse gas emissions on the U.S. economy is small, even difficult to measure against projected economic growth, the study finds.“We can afford an ambitious climate policy for just pennies on the dollar. It’s a small investment that will pay off in cleaner air, new jobs, and a safer world,” said Nathaniel Keohane, PhD, director of economic policy and analysis at Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), and a former associate professor of economics at the Yale School of Management. “Not acting now just means paying a heavier price later as we try to manage the consequences of unchecked climate change.”The study, What Will it Cost to Protect Ourselves From Global Warming?, is the first comprehensive analysis of the leading economic modeling of cap and trade legislation to combat climate change. Key findings of the analysis, online at http://www.edf.org/climatecosts, include:
The U.S. economy has grown nearly three percent per year on average in the post-war period, and that growth is projected to continue. If the U.S. capped its greenhouse gas emissions, the projected median impact of that cap on growth would be three one-hundredths of one percent (0.03%), the analysis finds.“Put another way, our gross domestic product is projected to reach $26 trillion in January 2030. If we capped greenhouse gases, according to these studies, the economy would hit that same mark by April,” Keohane said.The study highlights the fact that none of the models takes into account the high costs of inaction. Each looks only at one side of the ledger: the costs of reducing emissions, rather than the benefits of avoiding the consequences of unchecked climate change.“It’s important to keep in mind that these forecasting models compare climate policy to a business-as-usual case that doesn’t take the costs of climate change into account,” said Keohane. “If we fail to take action on global warming, the future will be anything but ‘business as usual.’ The most expensive policy by far is to do nothing at all.” According to a recent study by the University of Maryland, runaway global warming will impact every economic sector and every region of the country, straining public budgets and impacting jobs and competitiveness.The EDF study focuses on cap-and-trade programs that would cut U.S. emissions by 60% or more below current levels by the year 2050 – including the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (S. 2191) currently before the Senate. The analyses surveyed were performed by five of the most highly respected economic modeling groups in government and academia, at the Energy Information Agency, Research Triangle Institute, Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Pacific Northwest National Laboratories.A key feature of the report is its broad scope. “The cardinal rule about economic models is: Never trust any single number,” Keohane said. “No one model alone is a useful guide to the future, because they all make different assumptions about the factors that drive the economy.” Indeed, the EDF study finds that the models vary in their “business-as-usual” forecasts for the year 2030 by 10 percent — an order of magnitude greater than the projected impact of climate policy in that year. “In that sense, the projected impact of climate policy is well within the margin of error,” said Keohane. “The models don’t agree on much about what the future will look like, but they do agree that the impact of climate policy will be small.”An appendix to the report offers a detailed “Consumer’s Guide to Economic Models,” discussing the strengths and limitations of the economic models surveyed, as well as the key assumptions behind them.The new Environmental Defense Fund analysis is available online at http://www.edf.org/climatecosts. |