CounterPunch -Weekend Edition
October 10 / 12, 2008

High Times for the Atom Lobby
Obama's Nuclear Ambition

By Jeffrey St. Clair and Joshua Frank

It is fast becoming one of the most important issues of the 2008
presidential campaign. Both major candidates want to search for more
domestic oil supplies, promising to drill up and down the spine of the Rocky Mountains and off our fragile coastlines. The perceived threat of global warming is making even the most skeptical of politicians a bit nervous. The future of planet Earth, they claim, is more perilous than ever.

Al Gore has made an impact.

Too bad the Gore effect is like a bad hangover: all headache no buzz. The purported solution to the imminent warming crisis, nuclear technology, is just as hazardous as our current methods of energy procurement. Al Gore, who wrote of the potential green virtues of nuclear power in his book Earth in the Balance, earned his stripes as a congressman protecting the interests of two of the nuclear industry's most problematic enterprises, the TVA and the Oak Ridge Labs. And, of course, Bill Clinton backed the Entergy Corporation' s outrageous plan to soak Arkansas ratepayers with the cost overruns on the company's Grand Gulf reactor which provided power to electricity consumers in Louisiana.

The Clinton years indeed saw an all-out expansion of nuclear power around the globe. First came the deal to begin selling nuclear reactors to China, announced during Jiang Zemin's 1997 visit Washington, even though Zemin brazenly vowed at the time not to abide by the so-called "full scope safeguards" spelled out in the International Atomic Energy Act. The move was apparently made over the objections of Clinton's National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, who cited repeated exports by China of "dual use" technologies to Iran, Pakistan and Iraq. The CIA also weighed in against the deal, pointing out in a report to the President that "China was the single most import supplier of equipment and technology for weapons of mass destruction" worldwide. In a press conference on the deal, Mike McCurry said these nuclear reactors will be "a lot better for the planet than a bunch of dirty coal-fired plants" and will be "a great opportunity for American vendors" - that is, Westinghouse.

A day later Clinton signed an agreement to begin selling nuclear technology to Brazil and Argentina for the first time since 1978, when Jimmy Carter canceled a previous deal after repeated violations of safety guidelines and nonproliferation agreements.

In a letter to congress, Clinton vouched for the South American countries, saying they had made "a definitive break with earlier ambivalent nuclear policies." Deputy National Security Advisor Jim Steinberg justified the nuclear pact with Brazil and Argentina as "a partnership in developing clean and reliable energy supplies for the future." Steinberg noted that both countries had opposed binding limits on greenhouse emissions and that new nuclear plants would be one way "to take advantage of the fact that today we have technologies available for energy use which were not available at the time that the United States and other developed countries were going through their periods of development. "

The atom lobby during the 1990s had a stranglehold on the Clinton
administration and now they seem to have the same suffocating grip around the neck of the brightest star in the Democratic field today: Barack Obama.

In 2006 Obama took up the cause of Illinois residents who were angry with Exelon, the nation's largest nuclear power plant operator, for not having disclosed a leak at one of their nuclear plants in the state. Obama responded by quickly introducing a bill that would require nuclear
facilities to immediately notify state and federal agencies of all leaks,
large or small. At first it seemed Obama was intent on making a change in the reporting protocol, even demonizing Exelon's inaction in the press. But Obama could only go so far, as Exelon executives, including Chairman John W. Rowe who serves as a key lobbyist for the Nuclear Energy Lobby, have long been campaign backers, raising hundreds of thousands of dollars dating back to Obama's days in the Illinois State Legislature.

Despite his initial push to advance the legislation, Obama's office
eventually rewrote the bill, producing a version that was palatable to
Exelon and the rest of the nuclear industry. "Senator Obama's staff was
sending us copies of the bill to review, we could see it weakening with each successive draft," said Joe Cosgrove, a park district director in Will
County, Illinois, where the nuclear leaks had polluted local ground water.
"The teeth were just taken out of it."

Inevitably the bill died a slow death in the Senate. And like an experienced political operative, Obama came out of the battle as a martyr for both sides of the cause. His constituents back in Illinois thought he fought a good fight while industry insiders knew the Obama machine was worth investing in.

Obama's campaign wallet, while rich with millions from small online
donations, is also bulging from $227,000 in contributions given by employees of Exelon. Two of Obama's largest campaign fundraisers include Frank M. Clark and John W. Rogers Jr., both top Exelon officials. Even Obama's chief strategist, David Axelrod, has done consulting work for the company.

During a Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works hearing in 2005, Obama, who serves on the committee, asserted that since Congress was debating the negative impact of CO2 emissions "on the global ecosystem, it is reasonable -- and realistic -- for nuclear power to remain on the table for consideration. " Shortly thereafter, Nuclear Notes, the industry's top trade publication, praised the senator. "Back during his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2004, [Obama] said that he rejected both liberal and conservative labels in favor of 'common sense solutions'. And when it comes to nuclear energy, it seems like the Senator is keeping an open mind."

The rising star of the Democratic Party's ties to the nuclear industry run
deep indeed, but Obama may not only be loyal to Exelon and friends.

Sadly for the credibility of the atom lobby, some of their more eye-grabbing numbers don't check out. For example, as noted in a report by the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuke industry claims that the world's 447 nuclear plants reduce CO2 emissions by 30 percent. But existing nuclear plants save only about 5 percent of total CO2 emissions, hardly a bargain given the costs and risks associated with nuclear power. As you go up the nuclear fuel chain, you have carbon dioxide emissions at every single step -- from uranium mining, milling, enrichment, fuel fabrication, reactor construction to the transportation of the radioactive waste.

Moreover, the nuclear lobby likes to compare its record to coal-fired
plants, rather than renewables such as solar, wind, and geothermal. Even when compared to coal, atomic power fails the test if investments are made to increase the efficient use of the existing energy supply. One recent study by the Rocky Mountain Institute found that "even under the most optimistic cost projections for future nuclear electricity, efficiency is found to be 2.5 to 10 times more cost effective for CO2-abatement. Thus, to the extent that investments in nuclear power divert funds away from efficiency, the pursuit of a nuclear response to global warming would effectively exacerbate the problem."

Clearly Senator Obama recognizes the inherent dangers of nuclear technology and knows of the disastrous failures that plagued Chernobyl, Mayak and Three Mile Island. Yet, despite his attempts to alert the public of future toxic nuclear leaks, Obama still considers nuclear power a viable alternative to coal-fired plants. The atom lobby must certainly be pleased.

************ *

Jeffrey St. Clair is the author of Been Brown So Long It Looked Like Green to Me: the Politics of Nature and Grand Theft Pentagon. His newest books, Born Under a Bad Sky and Red State Rebels: Tales of Grassroots Resistance in the Heartland (co-edited with Joshua Frank) are just out from AK Press. He can be reached at: sitka@comcast. net.

Joshua Frank is co-editor of Dissident Voice and author of Left Out! How
Liberals Helped Reelect George W. Bush (Common Courage Press, 2005), and along with Jeffrey St. Clair, the editor of the brand new book Red State Rebels: Tales of Grassroots Resistance in the Heartland, published by AK Press in July 2008.

Demand the Clean Energy Future We Deserve
Target: U.S. Congress
Sponsored by: League of Conservation Voters

Offshore platforms littering the nation's coasts. Oil derricks pumping in the last refuges of Alaska. And even more record profits for Big Oil.

It's a grim future if Big Oil has its way -- but we still have time to stop them and promote the clean energy future we deserve.

In the last weeks before the election and into the next year, legislators will be considering measures that would open up millions of acres to more drilling -- even though Big Oil already has permission to drill on almost 70 million acres -- and even though Bush's own Department of Energy has admitted that more drilling will not lower gas prices!

Drilling along our coastlines and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge will not solve our country's energy problems or ease our dangerous addiction to oil. We cannot allow Congress to be fooled by the smooth talk of Big Oil -- take action today!

Keep Colorado's Roadless Area Protected!

Despite eight years of trying to undermine Roadless Rule protections, the Bush Administration has had remarkably little success in opening roadless areas to development. That's real cause for celebration. But in Colorado, the future of our roadless areas is still in doubt. It's critically important that you tell the Forest Service that Colorado's roadless areas must be protected – for their wilderness, wildlife, watersheds – and for future generations.

Dear Friends -

This is an exciting time on our planet.  We have a chance to live 'where the rubber meets the road' and be the pioneers of a new global civilization based on consciousness, harmony, social justice and sustainability.

Below is a link to a trailer for a movie being created by some powerful 'movers and shakers' like you and me who are paving this path of global transformation with love, energy and enthusiasm.

Enjoy the clip and if you're inclined, add your energy and inspiration - the specific difference you have come here to make - as live out our finest intent and fulfill the promise of an evolutionary journey in human consciousness.

We've all come here, now, quite purposefully.  It is our time. http://www.theshiftmovie.com

moving forward,

Coach Louise

Dear Christine,

Tell Obama & McCain:
We need clean energy --
not "clean coal"

Ten days ago, you joined thousands of other Americans across the country for Green Jobs Now -- a day to build the clean energy economy. Because of your willingness to stand up and get involved, Green Jobs Now was a resounding success. Along with Green for All, Al Gore's We Campaign, and dozens of other groups nationally, 1Sky was one of the partner organizations sponsoring Green Jobs Now.

Nearly 700 communities in all 50 states hosted Green Jobs Now events and over 50,000 people have signed the "I'm Ready" petition. Together we're sending a strong message to Congress and the presidential candidates: America is ready for green jobs, a clean energy economy, and bold solutions to the climate challenge.

Now that the Green Jobs Now day of action has come and gone, I wanted to let you know how to stay involved in the push for green jobs and bold climate solutions. 1Sky is building a grassroots movement for bold federal action on climate change in line with what the latest science says we must do to beat back global warming before it's too late. Pivoting to a clean energy economy that creates millions of green jobs is a major component of our 1Sky Solutions.

Right now, we have a chance to move the presidential candidates away from dirty fossil fuels, and get them to embrace real solutions to our energy and climate crises. Tell John McCain and Barack Obama we need clean energy creating 5 million green jobs, not "clean coal":

http://action.1sky.org/t/1981/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=713

In the past few weeks, the McCain and Obama campaigns have engaged in a wrong-headed debate over who supports "clean coal" the most. But this debate misses the point: There's no such thing as clean coal--it's a myth created by the coal companies to keep raking in giveaways from politicians in Washington.

Tell Senators McCain and Obama to support real solutions to our energy crisis:

http://action.1sky.org/t/1981/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=713

I'm looking forward to working with you, and I hope you stay active in the movement for green jobs, a clean economy, and bold solutions to the climate challenge.

P.S. We need at least 20,000 people to send messages to the campaigns to have a real impact. Help us reach our goal:

Dear Friends -

This is an exciting time on our planet.  We have a chance to live 'where the rubber meets the road' and be the pioneers of a new global civilization based on consciousness, harmony, social justice and sustainability.  We might be focusing on the detail going on in our lives - fertility issues, financial issues etc, but lets stand back and look at the bigger picture for a couple of minutes. 

Below is a link to a trailer for a movie being created by some powerful 'movers and shakers' like you and me who are paving this path of global transformation with love, energy and enthusiasm.

Enjoy the clip and if you're inclined, add your energy and inspiration - the specific difference you have come here to make - as live out our finest intent and fulfill the promise of an evolutionary journey in human consciousness.

We've all come here, now, quite purposefully.  It is our time. http://www.theshiftmovie.com

lovingly yours,

Coach Louise

Can Coal Be Clean? A Debate Between Michael Brune of Rainforest Action Network and Joe Lucas of American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity

While John McCain and Barack Obama have painted clean coal as a panacea that will help solve the nation’s energy problem, many environmental and scientific groups have questioned whether the burning of coal can ever be clean. We host a debate between Rainforest Action Network director Michael Brune, author of the new book Coming Clean: Breaking America’s Addiction to Oil and Coal, and Joe Lucas of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.

Half of mammals 'in decline', says extinction Red

BARCELONA (AFP) - Half the world's mammals are declining in population and more than a third probably face extinction, said an update Monday of the "Red List," the most respected inventory of biodiversity.

A comprehensive survey of mammals included in the annual report by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), which covers more than 44,000 animal and plant species, shows that a quarter of the planet's 5,487 known mammals are clearly at risk of disappearing forever.

But the actual situation may be even grimmer because researchers have been unable to classify the threat level for another 836 mammals due to lack of data.

"In reality, the number of threatened mammals could be as high as 36 percent," said IUCN scientist Jan Schipper, lead author of the mammal survey, in remarks published separately in the US-based journal Science.

The most vulnerable groups are primates, our nearest relatives on the evolutionary ladder, and marine mammals, including several species of whales, dolphins and porpoises.

"Our results paint a bleak picture of the global status of mammals worldwide," said Schipper.

The revised Red List, unveiled at the IUCN's World Conservation Congress in Barcelona, is further evidence that Earth is undergoing the first wave of mass extinction since dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago, many experts say.

Over the last half-billion years, there have only been five other periods of mass extinction.

The Red List classifies plants and animals in one of half-a-dozen categories depending on their survival status.

Nearly 40 percent of 44,838 species catalogued are listed as "threatened" with extinction, with 3,000 of them classified as "critically endangered," meaning they face a very high probability of dying out.

There were a few slivers of good news showing that conservation efforts can prevent a species from slipping into the category from which there is no return: "extinct."

The black-footed Ferret, native to the United States, was moved from "Extinct in the Wild" to "Endangered" after it was successfully introduced into seven U.S. states and Mexico.

The European bison and the wild horse of Mongolia made similar comebacks from the brink starting in the early 1990s.

But these remain exceptions that highlight the need to act before other species populations dwindle beyond the threshold of viability, experts say.

"The longer we wait, the more expensive it will be to prevent future extinctions," said Jane Smart, the head of the IUCN's Species Programme. "We now know what species are threatened, what the threats are and where."

The window of opportunity for great apes and monkey appears to be closing far more quickly that scientists realised, the new study shows.

"I was blown away when I saw the results, even though I was deeply involved in the work," said Michael Hoffman, a mammal expert at Conservation International who helped compile the Red List.

"Nearly 80 percent of primates in Asia are threatened with extinction, overwhelmingly because of hunting and habitat loss."

A voracious appetite in China for traditional medicines and prestige foods is the main driver of primate loss in Southeast Asia, he said.

Sea mammals are also highly vulnerable. "The situation is particularly serious ... for marine species, victims of our increasingly intensive use of the oceans," said Schipper.

Mile-wide fishing nets, vessel strikes, toxic waste and sound pollution from military sonar kill up to 1,000 air-breathing, ocean-dwelling mammals every day, previous research has shown.

There are many drivers of species extinction and all of them stem either directly or indirectly from human activity, scientists say.

Overwhelmingly, the main threat is habitat loss, with hunting and pollution major factors as well.

But climate change is also emerging as a menace.

Species dependant on sea ice such as polar bears and harp seals, for example, are especially vulnerable to shrinking ice cover in the Arctic Circle.

Scientists are also alarmed by "catastrophic declines" in fresh-water amphibians and some mammals caused by poorly understood infections, said Schipper.

More than 60 percent of Tasmanian devils, for example, have been wiped out in the last decade by a disfiguring facial cancer that spreads through physical contact.

"Disease has always had a role to play in affecting populations, but now we are seeing diseases that are highly pathogenic," said Hoffman.

With 11,000 volunteer scientists and more than 1,000 paid staff, the IUCN runs thousands of field projects around the globe to monitor and help manage natural environments.

More than 8,000 ministers, UN officials, NGOs, scientists and business chiefs began brainstorming Sunday for 10 days in the Spanish city of Barcelona on how to brake this loss and steer the world onto a path of sustainable development.

Seas Turn to Acid as They Soak Up CO2

by Robin McKie

The Bay of Naples is renowned for its breathtaking beauty and glittering clear waters. For centuries, tourists have flocked to the region to experience its glories.

In Ischia's highly acidic water Algae vital for binding coral reefs have been wiped out. But beneath the waves, scientists have uncovered an alarming secret. They have found streams of gas bubbling up from the seabed around the island of Ischia. 'The waters are like a Jacuzzi - there is so much carbon dioxide fizzing up from the seabed,' said Dr Jason Hall-Spencer, of Plymouth University. 'Millions of litres of gas bubble up every day.'

The gas streams have turned Ischia's waters into acid, and this has had a major impact on sea life and aquatic plants. Now marine biologists fear that the world's seas could follow suit.

'Every day the oceans absorb more than 25m tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere,' said Hall-Spencer. 'If it were not for the oceans, levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere would be far higher than they are today and the impact of climate change would be far worse. However, there is a downside: it is called ocean acidification.'

Scientists calculate that the seas are absorbing so much carbon dioxide that they are 30 per cent more acidic than they were at the start of the Industrial Revolution. The change is three times greater and has happened 100 times faster than at any other time during the past 20 million years.

Tomorrow hundreds of scientists will gather in Monaco for the 'Second International Symposium on the Ocean in a High CO2 World'. One focus of debate is likely to be the Plymouth study. The seas off Ischia - which are affected by carbon dioxide from volcanic activity - offer a first-class opportunity to investigate what might happen in the next few decades.

Scientists found that in Ischia's highly acidic water:

• Biodiversity of plants and fish has dropped by 30 per cent

• Algae vital for binding coral reefs have been wiped out

• Invasive 'alien' species, such as sea-grasses, are thriving

• Coral and sea urchins have been destroyed, while mussels and clams are failing to grow shells.

The conference will also tackle the dangers posed to fish larvae, which are sensitive to high levels of acid, as well as the threat to commercial fish stocks.

'Many developing countries have seafood as their prime source of food,' said Dr Carol Turley, of the Plymouth Marine Laboratory. 'If they lose that, the result could be famine.'

© Guardian News and Media Limited 2008

Ike Environmental Toll Apparent

by Dina Cappiello, Frank Bass and Cain Burdeau

WASHINGTON - Hurricane Ike's winds and massive waves destroyed oil platforms, tossed storage tanks and punctured pipelines. The environmental damage only now is becoming apparent: At least a half million gallons of crude oil spilled into the Gulf of Mexico and the marshes, bayous and bays of Louisiana and Texas, according to an analysis of federal data by The Associated Press.

Birds fly around as others sit on a pier damaged by Hurricane Ike Thursday, Oct. 2, 2008 in Gilchrist, Texas. One of North America's renowned bird migration and bird watching areas is strangely silent in the aftermath of Hurricane Ike. (AP Photo/David J. Phillip)In the days before and after the deadly storm, companies and residents reported at least 448 releases of oil, gasoline and dozens of other substances into the air and water and onto the ground in Louisiana and Texas. The hardest hit places were industrial centers near Houston and Port Arthur, Texas, as well as oil production facilities off Louisiana's coast, according to the AP's analysis.

"We are dealing with a multitude of different types of pollution here ... everything from diesel in the water to gasoline to things like household chemicals," said Larry Chambers, a petty officer with the U.S. Coast Guard Command Center in Pasadena, Texas.

The Coast Guard, with the Environmental Protection Agency and state agencies, has responded to more than 3,000 pollution reports associated with the storm and its surge along the upper Texas coast. Most callers complain about abandoned propane tanks, paint cans and other hazardous materials containers turning up in marshes, backyards and other places.

No major oil spills or hazardous materials releases have been identified, but nearly 1,500 sites still need to be cleaned up.

The Coast Guard's National Response Center in Washington collects information on oil spills and chemical and biological releases and passes it to agencies working on the ground. The AP analyzed all reports received by the center from Sept. 11 through Sept. 18 for Louisiana and Texas, providing an early snapshot of Ike's environmental toll.

With the storm approaching, refineries and chemical plants shut down as a precaution, burning off hundreds of thousands of pounds of organic compounds and toxic chemicals. In other cases, power failures sent chemicals such as ammonia directly into the atmosphere. Such accidental releases probably will not result in penalties by regulators because the releases are being blamed on the storm.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry also suspended all rules, including environmental ones, that would inhibit or prevent companies preparing for or responding to Ike.

Power outages also caused sewage pipes to stop flowing. Elsewhere, the storm's surge dredged up smelly and oxygen-deprived marsh mud, which killed fish and caused residents to complain of nausea and headaches from the odor.

At times, a new spill or release was reported to the Coast Guard every five minutes to 10 minutes. Some were extremely detailed, such as this report from Sept. 14: "Caller is making a report of a 6-by-4-foot container that was found floating in the Houston Ship Channel. Caller states the container was also labeled 'UM 3264,' which is a corrosive material." The caller most likely meant UN3264, an industrial coding that refers to a variety of different acids.

State and federal officials have collected thousands of abandoned drums, paint cans and other containers.

Other reports were more vague. One caller reported a sheen from an underwater pipeline and said the substance was "spewing" from the pipe.

The AP's analysis found that, by far, the most common contaminant left in Ike's wake was crude oil - the lifeblood and main industry of both Texas and Louisiana. In the week of reports analyzed, enough crude oil was spilled nearly to fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool, and more could be released, officials said, as platforms and pipelines were turned back on.

The Minerals Management Service, which oversees oil production in federal waters offshore, said the storm destroyed at least 52 oil platforms of roughly 3,800 in the Gulf of Mexico. Thirty-two more were severely damaged. But there was only one confirmed report of an oil spill - a leak of 8,400 gallons that officials said left no trace because it dissipated with the winds and currents.

Air contaminants were the second-most common release, mostly from the chemical plants and refineries along the coast.

About half the crude oil was reported spilled at a facility operated by St. Mary Land and Exploration Co. on Goat Island, Texas, a spit of uninhabited land north of the heavily damaged Bolivar Peninsula. The surge from the storm flooded the plant, leveling its dirt containment wall and snapping off the pipes connecting its eight storage tanks, which held the oil and water produced from two wells in Galveston Bay.

By the time the company reached the wreckage by boat more than 24 hours after Ike's landfall, the tanks were empty. Only a spattering of the roughly 266,000 gallons of oil spilled was left, and that is already cleaned up, according to Greg Leyendecker, the company's regional manager. The rest vanished, likely into the Gulf of Mexico.

Ike's fury might have helped prevent worse environmental damage. Its rough water, heavy rains and wind helped disperse pollution.

Air quality tests by Texas environmental regulators found no problems even in communities near industrial complexes, where power outages and high winds in some cases knocked out emergency devices that safely burn off chemicals. But the storm also zapped many of the state's permanent air pollution monitors in the region.

"We came out of this a lot better than we could have been, especially thinking where the storm hit," said Kelly Cook, the homeland security coordinator for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

Katrina ranked as among the worst environmental disasters in U.S. history, with about 9 million gallons of oil spilled. But Ike's storm surge was less severe than feared - 12 feet rather than 20-feet plus - and the dikes, levees and bulkheads built around the region's heavy industry mostly held.

Much of that infrastructure is protected by a 1960s-era Army Corps of Engineers system of 15-foot levees similar to the one around New Orleans that failed catastrophically during Katrina. In that storm, floodwaters dislodged an oil tank at a Murphy Oil Corp. refinery in Meraux, La., spilling more than 1 million gallons of oil into the surrounding neighborhoods, canals and playgrounds.

Ike's toll on wildlife is still unfolding. Only a few pelicans and osprey turned up oiled, but the storm upended nature. Winds blew more than 1,000 baby squirrels from their nests. The storm's surge pushed saltwater into freshwater marshes and bayous, killing grasses where cattle graze and displacing alligators. Flooding also stranded cows.

The storm also may mangle migration. The Texas coast is a pit stop for birds heading south for the winter. But Ike wiped out many of their food sources, stripping berries from trees and nectar-producing flowers from plants, said Gina Donovan, executive director of the Houston Audubon Society, which operates 17 bird sanctuaries in Texas.

"It is going to cause wildlife to suffer for awhile," she said.

Along the Houston Ship Channel, a tanker truck floating in 12-feet-high flood waters slammed into a storage tank at the largest biodiesel refinery in the country, causing a leak of roughly 2,100 gallons of vegetable oil. The plant, owned by GreenHunter Energy Inc., uses chicken fat and beef tallow to make biodiesel shipped overseas. It opened just months earlier.

Oneal Galloway of Slidell, La., called to report oil in his neighborhood. The town, north of Lake Pontchartrain, was flooded with Ike's surge. He said oil had washed down the streets.

"It looked like a rainbow in the water," Galloway told the AP. "The residue of the oil is all over our fences, there were brown spots in the yard where it killed the grass."

The likely culprit was not a refinery or oil well, according to Shannon Davis, the director of the parish's public works department, but a neighbor brewing biodiesel in his backyard with used cooking grease.

Cain Burdeau reported from Texas.

© 2008 The Associated Press

Wise Up Dominion

Drill Drill Drill - Eve Ensler

Help Protect Oregon Wilderness!

If you appreciate opportunities for quiet recreation, you'll want to protect the, spectacular Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest in southwest Oregon.

The Forest Service is currently deciding how much of the forest should be exposed to the roar of dirt bikes, ATVs, and other off-road vehicles.

Your opinions about how this national gem should be managed can make all the difference in the world.

Cold on Climate Warming

by Derrick Z. Jackson

Did a substantive Sarah Palin show up? Darn right she did. And if you are an endangered species, look out.

As Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden gave a steady performance, Palin revealed herself to be an understudy of President Bush when she said she did not want to argue about the causes of global warming. Of course she did not want to argue about it on the national stage, because she has been doing as governor of Alaska what Bush has done in the White House: Say you want sound science and then ignore it.

When she ran for governor, Palin said she was unconvinced that human emissions are a major cause of global warming. When even the Bush White House was willing to put the polar bear on the endangered species list, Palin - with Alaska's oil and gas industries in mind - wrote Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne to protest, "I am concerned that the determination made by the service is based on incomplete information . . . The consequences of listing the polar bear will have widespread social and economic impacts without providing any more protection for the bears."

In an even more direct missive to Kempthorne, Palin wrote that endangered species protection "has the potential to damage Alaska's and the nation's economy without any benefit to polar bear numbers or their habitat."

Palin last year referred to the polar bear as an exaggerated "metaphor in the highly charged climate change debate." With a denial of the impact of global warming that is even worse than that of the Bush administration, she confirmed that she herself is a metaphor - for a Republican Party fatally unsound in dealing with sound science.

© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company
--Derrick Z. Jackson

Ike: The Silent Storm

by Teresa Van Deusen

The evacuees from Hurricane Gustav had just returned home September 5th when Hurricane Ike began to head for the Gulf of Mexico. National news covered the track of Ike through the Gulf non-stop in the five days leading up to landfall. More than a million Texans sought shelter away from the coast and countless more piled in with family and friends. The storm came aground on around 1:00 AM on Saturday, September 14th with a category 5 surge of saltwater and category 2 winds of 115 mph.

In the dark of the night 45, 000 homes were destroyed and millions of residents lost electricity, water, and roofs. Then Ike turned north, leaving hundreds of thousands more Americans without power in a 200 mile wide swath from the Gulf Coast to the Great Lakes.

And then there was silence. No hum of air conditioners. No stereos blasting or people singing off key. No loudspeaker from the football games on Friday night. Just an eerie quiet as people emerged from their hiding places to survey the damage.

The Media was not allowed to film people being rescued from rooftops in Texas. They were prohibited from flying over the small towns and beaches isolated by flooding and decimated by the hurricane. Local press raged about the conditions, then fell silent in a game of play-nice hoping to be allowed at least limited access. Not once did the national press report this suspension of the first amendment. The sound of black hawk helicopters could be heard for miles.

With cable TV down, and electricity at a premium, the primary source of information was local radio. Listeners tuned in hoping for updates and relevant information which seemed to come irregularly between endless chatter. If you had an antennae and power you might have been able to tune into the local news. For seven days after the storm only local news was broadcast. Not a whisper of Caylee, or OJ, or Palin, nor the economic crises was heard for an entire week. Most relied on neighbors and friends for information in shared conversations over piles of debris.

Phone service was completely unreliable and is still spotty in most areas. Sometimes a call would randomly go through only to be randomly dropped. For a while only text messages got through. My mother finally tackled the texting learning curve from her closet as the storm raged outside. It's hard to express how you are really feeling in a simple text message while water pours into your bedroom. Nobody can hear you groan.

One day after the storm it rained, re-flooding homes and washing out roads. People started to clean up the debris and looters targeted homes instead of businesses. Some people went shopping and ice skating in the Houston Galleria, a surreal bubble of air conditioned normalcy. Local power trucks went out to assess the damage. 2000 people were rescued off Boliver by the Coast Guard. Stories began to roll in of residents who had tried to evacuate but found the ferry closed and the roads blocked by water. Evacuees in remote shelters began to check out, determined to get information on their home towns. The sound of cars driving around trees in the road began to weave its way back into the landscape.

24 hours after landfall, Ike began to disappear from the national news. 48 hours after landfall CNN and the Weather Channel evacuated Galveston Island and the airwaves fell silent.

Most people thought they would be back to work on that first Monday, but they were largely wrong. Millions of addresses did not have power. Elevators did not work. Trees blocked roads. A mere 100 traffic lights were working. A million people had no running water. Broken glass littered the streets of downtown. No local shelters had been opened, 14 regional hospitals were closed, and FEMA had not yet begun to distribute ice or water. Press conferences were relegated to sound bytes and Ike disappeared completely the front page of the most papers. Thousands who had ridden out the storm were bussed off Galveston Island. Evacuees who had left before the storm began being bussed back "closer to home and work". Employers booked hotel rooms for employees to keep their businesses running. Stillness fell over 3 million customers still in the dark. The hum of generators, a distinct growling, failed to drown out the buzz of mosquitoes.

On Tuesday, after President Bush had concluded his tour of the area, an army of repair trucks was finally deployed and PODs were set up. Rice University resumed classes and students bagged free ice for the neighbors. City, state and federal teams tried to stay calm with one other, a strained exercise at best. Local news continued to be purely local. And inversely, not many locals had power or a TV signal, so they hardly noticed. Information increased as a premium, Where can I buy gas? Are the banks open? Where can I charge my nebulizer? Sleep with my c-pap machine? Find safe drinking water? Buy a tarp? Or a generator? Price gouging ran amok. Half a million people finally had running water after 3 days, but the sound of flushing toilets and running showers seemed oddly loud by candlelight.

By the first Wednesday after the storm plans were announced, then changed, and changed again. 3.5 million people sought ice and water and gas and more food as they lived without power. FEMA announced hotel vouchers available online or via phone, the two services least reliable for days to come. Elderly Houston residents, living in high rise independent living facilities, were discovered left to their own devices without a/c or elevators. The shuffling of their determined feet in the dark stairwells could be hard as they climbed to check on their friends.

One week after Ike struck less than 50% of electricity had been restored. 250,000 people lived without water, most had missed a paycheck, and temperatures were rising. The bars hopped on Friday night. People clustered on brightly lit restaurant patios sharing a hot meal and telling tales. Entrepreneurs ran generators and beaconed to patrons who went home to inky black bedrooms and non-perishable pop top snacks. Normalcy resumed to some degree for those who could get it. For many it did not. Suspended somewhere between shelters and flooded homes, people still went back to work if they could. Jaws were clenched, but the recovery moved forward. Pride kept words from being said out loud.

The second Monday brought the long run home. Less than 1000 traffic lights were in working order. Rush hour resumed and a seven mile drive took four hours. There was a sort of togetherness among the people. It was important to be polite. There was surprisingly little honking. Miles of drivers hunkered down in their air conditioned cars talking on cell phones and reassuring themselves that this was a sign of normalcy.

Two weeks after this disaster 1.5 million people still go home to no power but that which they provide for themselves. The blue light of televisions run by generators blares out into the darkness. The sound of the newscasters voices are more frequently replaced by a game or movie. Cable is restored with news that never mentions Hurricane Ike. The remote shelters have all closed. All evacuees have been bussed back to their city of origin, found the rare hotel room, or bunked wherever they could. People in Galveston sleep in tents. FEMA ceased distributing ice and water days ago. Only two regional hospitals are reopened. Warnings about mold, vermin, mosquitoes, and "germs" are issued with reminders that medical care is not readily available. Restoration of power schedules are pushed back for lack of parts. Debris will not be removed until after Thanksgiving, or New Year's if we are lucky. 245, 000 Texans applied for emergency food stamps. Food banks are distributing four times their normal amount in an attempt to meet demand. More than 250,000 households have applied for FEMA assistance. There are no empty hotel rooms for 300 miles. The scurrying of bugs and rustling rodents amid the debris keeps people up at night.

I like to think that if America knew of the suffering in the south that help might be forthcoming. That maybe Galveston residents would not be sleeping in tents and fire stations might have the gas they need to go out on calls. I imagine that children would not be forced to sleep in cars because they can't find a FEMA hotel room. I would like to believe that the nation would protest the thought of waiting to bring in FEMA trailers until next week or the policy of bussing people "closer to home and work" when those places don't even exist anymore. But the rest of the nation doesn't know all these things because more reporters are covering OJ and Caylee than the millions of Americans disrupted by Ike.

It's been three weeks and it will certainly be many more before this is over. The Texas Guard is rolling out. Clean up crews and tow trucks rattle down the streets. Chainsaws replace generators. But still, the silence is deafening. Seriously deafening. As if no one is paying any attention at all.

Teresa Van Deusen is a freelance writer living in Austin, TX. She has been volunteering her skills to disaster relief efforts since 1998. For the past three weeks she has been working on Hurricane Ike recovery travelling from Austin to Houston delivering much needed supplies.

Companies Scramble for Ever-Scarcer Resources

by Wolfgang Kerler

NEW YORK - As humanity runs out of oil and minerals, the extraction of previously untouched deposits suddenly pays off -- financially. But experts warn that it will likely further accelerate climate change and seriously damage the environment.

Heavy equipment mines the oil tar sands at Syncrude's Aurora mine near Fort McMurray, Alberta in this May 23, 2006 file photo. (Todd Korol/Files/Reuters)Back in the 19th century it was easy to discover an oil well: one could accidentally step in a puddle of "black gold" -- it made its way to the surface voluntarily. But with conventional oil wells running dry, the industry is shifting to so-called "unconventional" sources like tar sands -- but not without problems.

"It takes two to three times more energy to get a barrel back from tar sands than from conventional crude oil," said Steve Andrews, co-founder of the U.S.-based Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO), in an interview with IPS.

Hand-in-hand with the needed large amount of energy is significantly more carbon emissions, which is counterproductive in the global fight against climate change.

Other unpleasant byproducts are vast ponds full of toxic water, such as are used during the production of synthetic oil from tar sands. Hundreds of waterfowl have already died in those contaminated tarns.

Nevertheless, as the price of oil has more than tripled in the last few years -- it is now around 100 dollars per barrel -- the cost-intensive mining of tar sands has become more and more profitable.

With an estimated 173 billion barrels, the world's largest deposits are found in Alberta, Canada, making the country's oil reserves only second to those of Saudi Arabia.

But as Andrews said: "All barrels aren't created equally."

After four decades of excavation and engineering, the flow of oil from Canadian tar sands is still covering less than two percent of worldwide consumption, which is about 85 million barrels a day.

In contrast, Saudi Arabia accounts for 12 percent of worldwide production.

Andrews points out that all major sources of unconventional oil -- which also include extra-heavy oil from Venezuela and oil shale from the United States -- share the same problems.

He also warned that off-shore drilling or oil extraction in the Alaskan Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) "will not be a saviour" of the United States's energy problems.

Biofuels such as corn-based ethanol, which have been criticised for driving up food prices, are too land-intensive and will never be an adequate substitute for fossil fuels, he added.

"All those measures will only slow down the decline in worldwide oil production but they cannot stop it," said Andrews. "The alternative which shows the most promise to reduce environmental problems is an electric-powered transportation system running on renewable energy."

Andrews and other experts from ASPO are expecting global oil production to peak in the next two to five years -- despite the various substitutes for conventional crude oil, and despite the fact that demand is still growing.

A study for the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA) is somewhat more optimistic, estimating peak crude oil production to occur between the years 2021 and 2112.

According to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy, the worldwide level of production has not significantly changed since 2005. It oscillated between 81 and 82 million barrels a day -- with a small decrease in 2007.

But oil should not be the only matter of concern.

Studies from Australia and Italy point out that peaks in the production of some minerals are to be expected in this century, too -- for example, of copper and gold. Others like mercury and phosphate might have hit their peak already.

The growing scarcity involves greater endeavours in mining which are again -- as in the case of oil -- doing greater harm to environment.

"The deposits we are going after now have lower concentration of minerals. And where concentration is lower, there is more waste," Ramsey Hart, Canada programme coordinator of Mining Watch, told IPS.

Enormous quantities of waste rock loaded with heavy-metals and other toxic substances are left behind and contaminate water and air. Moreover, mining often leads to the destruction of natural habitats.

Lower concentration of minerals also means that much more energy is needed to extract it from the rock -- hence, more carbon emissions.

"Recycling metals is much more energy-efficient," said Hart. He also called for improved waste handling by the mining industry.

"Companies are now looking to areas that were previously considered to difficult for mining -- politically and logistically," said Scott Cardiff, international campaign coordinator of the Washington-based group Earthworks, which focuses on the destructive impacts of mineral development.

He told IPS that limited supply and high demand are the reasons for the expansion of mineral extraction -- especially in the case of gold, which is increasingly seen as a secure investment.

"In many cases mineral extraction is also continuing to expand to new areas as the result of political developments, including promotion of extractive industries by donor countries and international financial institutions," Cardiff said.

"Madagascar is an example of a country where mining is about to boom and where mining is affecting plans for new protected areas," he said.

And he gave more examples.

If approved, a copper-gold mine project in southwest Alaska's Bristol Bay could cause serious damage to the local ecosystem -- which is of vital importance for the world's stock of wild salmon.

According to Earthworks, another gold mine, which is planned in Ghana, would destroy over 180 acres of forest in the Ajenjua Bepo Forest Reserve.

Besides significant investments in renewable resources like wind and solar. Ramsey Hart offered a simple idea to solve the problems of diminishing natural resources, climate change and ecological destruction: "We just need to become more comfortable and satisfied with a lot less stuff."

© 2008 Inter Press Service

Ocean "Dead Zones" Spread: Study

by Alister Doyle

OSLO - The number of polluted "dead zones" in the world's oceans is rising fast and coastal fish stocks are more vulnerable to collapse than previously feared, scientists said on Monday.

The spread of "dead zones" -- areas of oxygen-starved water -- "is emerging as a major threat to coastal ecosystems globally," the scientists wrote in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Such zones are found from the Gulf of Mexico to the Baltic Sea in areas where algae bloom and suck oxygen from the water, feeding on fertilizers washed from fields, sewage, animal wastes and pollutants from the burning of fossil fuels.

"Marine organisms are more vulnerable to low oxygen content than currently recognized, with fish and crustaceans being the most vulnerable," said Raquel Vaquer Suner of the Mediterranean Institute for Advanced Studies in Spain.

"The number of reported hypoxic (low oxygen) zones is growing globally at a rate of 5 percent a year," she told Reuters.

Her study with a colleague showed that the number of "dead zones" had risen to more than 140 in 2004 from almost none until the late 1970s.

Hundreds of millions of people depend on coastal fisheries for food. Crustaceans such as crabs, lobsters and shrimps are less able to escape from low-oxygen waters than fish.

WARMING

Higher temperatures tied to global warming, blamed by the U.N. Climate Panel on human use of fossil fuels, may aggravate the problem of "dead zones," partly because oxygen dissolves less readily in warmer water, the study said.

The first "dead zones" were found in northern latitudes such as Chesapeake Bay on the U.S. east coast and Scandinavian fjords. Others have been appearing off South America, Ghana, China, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Portugal and Britain.

The study said that most scientists had until now reckoned that oxygen levels could fall to 2 milligrams per liter of sea water before the water was considered starved of oxygen.

But many creatures were far more sensitive. Larvae of one type of crab found off eastern Canada and the United States started suffering at oxygen levels of 8.6 mg per liter, just below normal levels.

"Currently used thresholds ... are not conservative enough to avoid widespread mortality losses," the scientists wrote. They urged a revised minimum of 4.6 mg of oxygen per liter as the lowest before water was considered hostile to life.

For Reuters latest environment blogs click on: blogs.reuters.com/environment/

Editing by Tim Pearce

Energy Expert Calls Oil Shale World's Worst Fossil Fuel

SALT LAKE CITY - Congress has just lifted a moratorium on oil shale development on federal land, but the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance is warning of its consequences. The organization is hosting a presentation tonight featuring Energy Analyst Randy Udall, brother of Colorado Congressman Mark Udall. He says it doesn't matter how high the price of oil gets, or how much we improve extraction technology, oil shale will never be an efficient energy resource.

To make the point about oil shale, Udall says, "There is three times more energy in a ton of captain crunch than there is in a ton of oil shale. Oil shale has the energy density of baked potatoes." "We concluded that oil shale is the world's worst fossil fuel, it's the least prospective fossil fuel on the planet. It is a fossil fuel, but just barely. There is three times more energy in a ton of captain crunch than there is in a ton of oil shale. Oil shale has the energy density of baked potatoes," Udall said.

The advocate says politicians only talk about oil shale when gas prices get too high. He believes the consequences of extracting oil shale would be devastating to federal lands.

"The allure, the dream of oil shale for Colorado and Utah would very quickly turn into a nightmare. We would need to build new cities for ten of thousands of workers, the social impacts would just be staggering. So, many politicians look at oil shale as a panacea, when in reality, when you understand what would be needed to produce it, it is the original nightmare," Udall said.

But Udall says he wants energy companies to try to develop oil shale resources, as he believes it will lead them to discover it simply won't work. The Oil and Tar Sands Road Show will be held at tonight at seven at the Olpin Student Union Theater at the University of Utah.

© Copyright 2008 KCPW

Bottled Water at Issue in Great Lakes

Conservation and Commerce Clash

by Kari Lydersen

CHICAGO - Even as a 10-year campaign to block wholesale export of Great Lakes water came to a successful conclusion in Congress last week, some legislators and environmentalists vowed to continue their fight to close a "bottled-water loophole," a campaign that taps into a national debate over sales of H2O in disposable containers.

Water from aquifers that feed Huron and the other Great Lakes is exempted from export regulations when it's in containers of less than 5.7 gallons. (By John L. Russell -- Associated Press)A provision of the Great Lakes Compact allows water to be diverted from the basin if it is in containers holding less than 5.7 gallons. The question is whether bottling water from the aquifers that feed the lakes, the largest repository of fresh water on Earth, should be seen as ordinary human consumption, commercial production, or export of a treasured natural resource.

In August, Nestle Waters North America was granted permits for a new well and pipeline at its Ice Mountain facility in Mecosta County, Mich., where it bottles 700,000 gallons a day. Nestle also recently renewed permits for its plant in Guelph, Ontario. Both have sparked vocal opposition from those who say the industry is privatizing a public good and harming the environment.

Americans drank 8.8 billion gallons of bottled water in 2007, up 7 percent from 2006, according to the Beverage Marketing Corp. But bottled water has drawn increasing criticism, leading San Francisco, Salt Lake City and Ann Arbor, Mich., among other municipalities, to ban buying bottled water with city funds.

Nestle spokesman Brian Flaherty said the industry is being unfairly singled out, since it is only one of many commercial sectors that use and export water. More Great Lakes region water goes into soda and beer cans, he said.

"How do you define a product?" he asked. "Water goes into beer in Wisconsin and radiators in Detroit. Why would you have a separate standard for bottled water versus soda?"

Bottled water accounts for less than 0.02 percent of groundwater withdrawals nationally, according to a 2004 University of Maryland study cited by the International Bottled Water Association. Fourteen times as much bottled water is imported into the Great Lakes basin than is exported, a U.S.-Canadian commission reported in 2000.

But opponents of bottled water say soda and beer are different because the water is consumed in making something else, whereas they view Nestle as taking a public good, paying very little for it, and making a profit on it.

They also fear that since the compact officially treats water as a "product," the door could be opened to further commercialization and sale. It was such fears that in 1998 launched the process that led to the compact, after the tiny company Nova Group obtained a permit from the Ontario government -- later withdrawn -- to ship up to 158 million gallons of Great Lakes water per year to Asia.

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), who led opposition to the compact because of the bottled-water loophole, has requested comments from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the State Department about how international trade issues will play out.

"Call me all wet, but I say, why don't we get the answers? Why are we rushing this?" he said.

Anu Bradford, a University of Chicago law professor, said international trade law cannot force a country to extract its natural resources -- such as water "in its pristine form in a lake." But once it is bottled and becomes itself a product, she said, trade agreements would prevent a ban on exports.

"How do we decide when water is a product?" she asked. "Under the WTO and NAFTA, there is no obligation for a state to extract its natural resources. The difference comes when it makes the decision to allow an entity to commercialize it and they do commercialize it. Then it is a product and you can't ban the export."

Doug Roberts Jr., director of environmental and energy policy at the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, agrees.

"We think it's critical that you are able to make products and ship them all over the world," Roberts said. "That's what you do in a free-market economy. We were very concerned groups would target one product and say that product can't be shipped. What's the difference between bottled water and beer or cherry juice? Those all have water in them."

Nestle is the biggest water bottler in Michigan but not the only one. PepsiCo and Coca-Cola bottle Detroit municipal water for their Aquafina and Dasani brands, respectively. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have water-bottling plants in Quebec and Ontario.

Opponents say Nestle's pumping is lowering water levels in local creeks and lakes -- systems that feed the Great Lakes. In Ontario, a hydrologist hired by a group opposing the Nestle plant reported that the company was using 7 percent of the local water supply and depleting the flow of a creek.

"As long as the bottled-water loophole remains, it's a gaping hole in the Great Lakes Compact that would lead to potentially sucking the Great Lakes dry," said Meera Karunananthan, national water campaigner for the Council of Canadians, a citizen group.

In both Ontario and Michigan, many residents are also angry that Nestle gets the water at low cost, paying the same rate as any other water user. But Terry Swier, president of Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation, said she doesn't necessarily want the company to pay for the water. "Then with the financial situation Michigan is in, we would just open up the state to any water bottler," she said. "We have to preserve and protect the waters for future generations."

Flaherty said he doesn't think bottled water, in or out of the Great Lakes basin, should get a bad rap.

"We're one of 70,000 different types of beverages you can buy," he said. "We use the least amount of water and the least amount of plastic, and we're good for you."

© 2008 The Washington Post

Urge Congress to Say No to Oil Shale

Right now, Congress is considering a proposal to end a moratorium on development of oil shale – a dangerous, new energy source which would threaten two million acres of America's public lands!

Some members of Congress want to rush us into developing oil shale despite the reality that it will put millions of acres of wildlife habitat at risk, threaten a significant portion of our country's water resources and dramatically increase global warming pollution.

Help Protect the Marbled Murrelet!

Flying at speeds topping 100 miles per hour, marbled murrelet zoom out to sea to feed during the day, returning to ancient forests at night to nest. The marbeled murrelet is a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, and would be even more at risk if the Bush Administration advances its proposal to reduce protections for some quarter of a million acres of ancient forest. Tell the agency NO to logging in the marbled murrelet's habitat.

http://ga1.org/campaign/Endangered_Species_Act/8kk5wg3ry36d6wk?

Dear Christine,

Tell Secretary Kempthorne to stop the attack on wildlife

Endangered species beware. The current administration has decided to use its final 6 months to try and weaken the Endangered Species Act (ESA), a law that was designed to protect some of our most threatened wildlife from extinction.

Tell Secretary Kempthorne to stop the attack on wildlife.

The ESA is one of our nation's bedrock environmental laws and for more than 30 years, the Act has protected many species from extinction. For years this administration has been trying to find a way to dismantle the ESA. But this time, in the waning days of the administration, government lawyers have engineered an attack on the ESA that will severely undermine the Act and result in more wildlife at risk of extinction. The latest attempt severely undermines the safety net provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The ramifications could be dire for some of the world's most endangered wildlife.

We need your voice on this issue, and with such a short window of opportunity, this could be the only chance we've got. Write your letter today and urge Secretary Kempthorne to pull the plug on the destruction on the ESA. Take action!

Thanks for all you do.