fossil fuels

Fresh off his DO THE MATH Tour (the most direct aim attack the fossil fuel corporations will likely ever see), Bill McKibben says he found this

the NY Times front page article comes from our Minneapolis roadshow last Friday night, and the article concisely lays out the demands and the strategy of the campaign. It’s precisely the boost we need. So please, go read it here: www.nyti.ms/SESrfr
We’re quickly getting traction, but we can get more if we have your help.

So, first things first: please email the article by clicking the "E-Mail" button on the New York Times website -- if we can get it on the newspaper's "most emailed list", we can help make sure it goes as far as possible, as fast as possible.

For full instructions on how to email the article, click here: www.350.org/nyt

Must be a commie

Every year, around the world, almost one trillion dollars of subsidies is handed out to help the fossil fuel industry. Who came up with the crazy idea that the fossil fuel industry deserves our hard-earned money, no less in economic times of such harsh human consequence? We fire teachers, police and firemen in drastic budget cuts and yet, the fossil fuel industry can laugh all the way to the bank on our dime? Something doesn't add up here.

We should not be subsidizing the destruction of our planet. Fossil fuels are literally cooking our planet, polluting our air and draining our wallets. Why should we continue to reward companies to do that?

Not the alternative we're looking for:

"With wood you get half the amount of energy typically than with conventional fossil fuels." Mitchell says it'll take at least 100 years for everything to equal out. "You're going to be doing more harm than good than if you were to just be using fossil fuels."

I could argue that (most) wood contains far fewer toxins and heavy metals than coal, but none of these are the proper questions. The proper question is: "Why are we still relying on steam to generate our power?" Which includes nuclear power, by the way. It's just a fancy (dangerous) steam engine. This is what we need:

I’m going to be really honest with you: after all the fights at the mall to get just the right present for everybody and the giant hassle of going to the Post Office so I can get the perfect stamps for my cards – and then worrying that I left someone off the list – I am just not in the mood to do a 9/11 story.

And it’s been getting worse every year. I mean, just like the “It’s Christmas Every Day Store”, I know there’s one of the “9/11 Every Day” stores open, in the all-too-human form of Rudy Giuliani, and I’ve learned to live with that, but it seems like they got started with the 9/11 earlier than ever this year – and by the time the TV memorials and analysis and retrospectives are all over, to paraphrase Lewis Black…I’m going to hate freedom.

In an effort to stave off this fate, we’ll be headed in a different direction today: I have three stories to pass along; each is important enough that you really should know about them, and yet they’re each very much bite-sized and easily digestible.

It’s all good stuff…so let’s get right to it.

On September 21, 2009,
the Second Circuit made an important decision on a case known as
Connecticut vs American Electric Power.
Without going into too much detail, this was a case where several groups like the Audubon society were trying to stop coal plant emissions because it was harming the value of their land trusts. The lower court ruled as other courts have, that Climate Change was part of the political realm, not the courts.
However, the appellate court overturned this decision on the grounds that the Energy company were causing a public nuisance, and nuisance cases have been heard by courts for decades.

And the energy grabs keep on coming:

Duke Energy and McCallum Sweeny Consulting have found that a 65-acre site off U.S. Highway 321 would be perfect for a data center. The land has easy access to both Interstate 85 and Interstate 40 and can be connected to a high-voltage electric line.

Details about the employment and investment capacity weren’t immediately available.

Of course they weren't. A lemonade stand would provide more employment and investment capacity for the area, but details like that end political careers.

When will the time come that Climate Change talks will start considering Human Rights over Business rights?
There is a growing group of people in our world who are in a legal limbo,
Environmental Refugees.
Even though there are hundreds to thousands of people currently being displaced by Climate Change, they do not have a defined status as a group, hence they are not really 'refugees.'
And according to current predictions by Oxfam International, by 2050 there will be 75 million Environmental Refugees displaced due to Climate Change. Other models are predicting up to 250 million people.