Tag Archives: facebook

Green America Rolls Out Handy Chocolate Scorecard

by CoyHargrove Posted on October 25, 2019

Share this idea!

Pin2
Facebook0

2shares

Lindt. Nestle. Hershey. Divine. Godivia. Alter Eco. Equal Exchange.

You have plenty of luscious options when selecting chocolate treats. With that wide selection is a rich opportunity to wield your spending power and reward firms that support environmental responsibility and fair labor practices for farmers.

Maybe you’re browsing for Halloween. Or you’re on the prowl for a scrumptious personal indulgence.

Green America, a nonprofit organization that focuses on economic action for social justice and environmental sustainability, encourages choosing wisely when buying chocolate. Especially if it involves links with child labor. And deforestation.

“It is an ideal product for voting with our dollars,” says Todd Larsen, executive co-director of Consumer and Corporate Engagement for Green America. “We can choose to purchase from brands that are working to build farmer income, address child labor, and promote ecological farming practices.”

Green America’s Chocolate Scorecard

Green America’s fresh ranking of chocolate companies features report-card grades, with emphasis on labor and environmental factors.

The scorecard is designed as a valuable resource for discriminating shoppers who appreciate information about ethical sourcing practices in products they purchase.

Green America Chocolate Scorecard. Source: GreenAmerica.org

Labor certifications, including Fairtrade, IMO Fair for Life, and UTZ, were factored into each brand’s ranking. (See more certifications and what they mean on Green America’s website.) Other factors, including efforts to support farmers — especially in West Africa — rounded out the scores.

“… we are not only looking at how much certified cocoa a major chocolate company has, we are also looking to see if the company has innovative programs and projects in place to address some of the other underlying issues of child labor in cocoa and if the company is working to address deforestation,” Green America’s website states.

Focusing on eliminating farmer poverty interconnects with and assists in resolving other social and environmental issues, according to Charlotte Tate, labor justice manager at Green America.

Harvesting cacao. Image: Adobe Stock

Examples of chocolate companies’ noteworthy programs and practices include:

Divine: 44 percent ownership by a farmers cooperative in Ghana
Alter Eco: investing in agroforestry, which integrates cacao with other crops for a healthy and diverse ecosystem, and offers additional produce and revenue for farmers
Endangered Species: donates 10 percent of profits to animals, habitat, and humanity

The Rankings

Firms leading the pack with grade A rankings include

Alter Eco
Divine
Equal Exchange
Endangered Species
Shaman
Theo Chocolate
Tony’s Chocolonely

Check out your favorite chocolate’s ranking in Green America’s scorecard. Photo by Pete Wright on Unsplash

Green America points out it did not include every chocolate company in its rankings, and notes that many of the A-rated firms are members of Green America’s Green Business Network of “socially and environmentally responsible businesses.”

Mars, Nestle, Hershey, and Lindt earned middle rankings.

Godiva received an F.

Green America’s website features a separate page offering extra information about the scores, including Godiva’s.

“Godiva has stated on its website that it has a goal of sourcing 100 percent sustainable cocoa by 2020. It has not indicated which certifications it is sourcing from, what progress it is making with this goal, or what additional steps it is taking to address child labor and farmer income. While its competitors publish annual reports on their progress, Godiva only reports minimal information on its website.”

Earth911 emailed a Godiva spokeswoman about its Green America grade, and she issued a quick reply.

“GODIVA condemns forced labor or any practice that exploits, endangers, or harms people, especially children. We do not own farms and purchase our cocoa through third parties, which puts us at a distinct disadvantage on scorecards such as these that don’t allow for an accurate representation of our longstanding commitment to people and planet. We ensure ethical sourcing through agreements with our suppliers to comply with our GODIVA Code of Conduct, which explicitly prohibits the use of forced and child labor.”

Let chocolate manufacturers know that you support environmental responsibility and fair labor practices. Photo by amirali mirhashemian on Unsplash

Speaking Out

While thoughtfully directing your dollars is a powerful tool to support preferred products, perhaps you’ll want to add fuel to your position.

Write a note directly to the firms you’re supporting or avoiding, explaining why you decided to purchase — or not purchase — their products.

Another route is signing a petition, such as Green America’s request to Godiva: “… share your progress with the public through a corporate responsibility report on your website that makes your progress on farmer income, child labor, and environmental protection fully transparent.”

Feature image by Security from Pixabay 

You Might Also Like…

Shopping Your Environmental and Social Values

This article is the first in a six-part series focused …Gemma AlexanderJune 21, 2019

How to Find Ethical Jewelry

No one wants to adorn themselves with environmental destruction and …Gemma AlexanderFebruary 5, 2019

3 Reasons to Avoid Mass-Manufactured Chocolate

When you find a chocolate brand you like, it’s hard …Jenna CyprusFebruary 24, 2017

earth911

Continued: 

Green America Rolls Out Handy Chocolate Scorecard

Posted in ALPHA, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Green America Rolls Out Handy Chocolate Scorecard

Electric Scooters: Dirty or Green Transportation?

by KellieJoris1 Posted on August 23, 2019

Share this idea!

Pin0
Facebook0

0shares

If you visit a city these days, you are sure to see Lime, Bird, Spin, or Skip electric scooters zipping between traffic and pedestrians or parked in rows near busy restaurants and malls. But these electric scooters might not be as green as you think. Shared electric scooter companies like to boast about their carbon-free credentials but that is not the whole truth. 

The Influx of Electric Scooters Across the U.S.

Love them or hate them, electric scooters seem to be here to stay. Shared or “dockless” — meaning riders don’t have to return them to a charging station after a ride — electric scooters rolled onto U.S. city streets in 2018 and ever since, have been rented millions of times over. 

The National Association of City Transportation Officials revealed that 38.5 million trips were taken on shared electric scooters in 2018, overtaking station-based bicycles as the most popular form of shared micro-mobility transportation in the U.S. in just the first year they were widely available.

The eclipse of the docked bicycles was mainly due to the introduction of a staggering 85,000 electric scooters available for public use in U.S. cities compared with 57,000 station-based bikes.

How Micro-Mobility Is Changing Urban Transport

As electric scooters have become more widely available to the public, a micro-mobility revolution has surfaced: U.S. citizens increasingly opt to travel the “last mile” by alternative over traditional transport methods. 

The changing landscape of urban transportation can be boiled down to two factors. The first is the ubiquity of electric scooters and smartphones. People can easily locate and rent shared electric scooters by using an app. After a small financial transaction conducted through a smartphone app, the renter can ride a scooter for a set period of time. The ability to pay from a smartphone app using a credit card makes the process of using an electric scooter extremely convenient.

The second factor is the dockless appeal of the shared micro-mobility devices. It is easy to see why electric scooters eclipsed the number of docked, station-based bikes in 2018. If a rider rents a docked bike, they need to return it to a docking station. But the dockless electric scooters can be found, ridden, and left almost anywhere. The convenience of hopping on an electric scooter, riding it from A to B, and leaving it wherever you want contributes significantly to the popularity of these shared micro-mobility devices.

Part of the appeal of shared electric scooters? Riders don’t need to return them to a docking station at the end of their ride. Photo: Paulo Almeida on Unsplash

The Recharge Process

Scooters don’t charge themselves. Throughout the day, the scooter service deploys people driving cars or trucks to collect scooters that have run through their electric charge. Batteries must be plugged in, and the maintenance person who picks them up must haul them to a workspace to recharge tired scooters.

Besides the source of power used, moving scooters from where the last rider left them to a recharging center — which may be someone’s home — produces the same CO2 output as the car or truck used. It’s a two-way trip and scooters must be redistributed where riders are likely to find and use them. We can’t calculate the total emissions, but if you are looking for a green ride, seek scooters from companies that document how much mileage and the types of vehicles used to collect and distribute their two-wheeled transportation.

The Invisible Carbon Contributor 

At face value, electric scooters appear to be carbon-free modes of transportation. But what you can’t see may come as a surprise.

Just like all other modes of transportation, electric scooters need fuel. With traditional modes of transportation such as cars, it is easy to see the pollutants being emitted from their tailpipes. But that is not the case with electric scooters. Although electric scooters may not directly emit emissions through tailpipes, they do contribute greenhouse gases once you factor in the energy used to charge the scooters.

The widespread use of electric scooters and the energy needed to keep the wheels rolling has had a direct effect on the environment. Research from Electric Scooter Insider revealed that, once you factor in the CO² that is released as a result of producing and delivering the electricity needed to charge the scooters, 146.21 grams, or about a third of a pound, of CO² is emitted for every mile ridden.

Bloomberg reported that the scooter riders average 1.5 miles per trip. Combining this with the 38.5 million trips, approximately 57.8 million miles were traveled on electric scooters in 2018. In fact, electric scooters contributed 9,308 tons of CO² in 2018, equivalent to the energy use of an average house for 650 years.

However, it’s not all bad. The amount CO² emissions would have been far greater if those 57.8 million miles were traveled using gas-powered cars. Traveling that distance by car instead of electric scooters, the amount of CO² emitted could have been more than double (22,720 tons).

Electric scooters may not be carbon-free but they still contribute 59 percent less CO² compared to the average car in America (356.91 grams of CO² per mile).

Current State of Electricity Generation in the U.S.

In 2018, fossil fuels made up the majority (63.5 percent) of U.S. electricity generation. This played a significant role in the CO² per mile emission factor for electric scooters.

Charging an electric scooter using clean energy sources would substantially reduce its carbon footprint. The current status of renewable energy sources for the U.S. accounts for only 17.1 percent of all electricity generated. The growing popularity of electric scooters is just one more reason the U.S. needs to expand its investment clean, renewable energy.

The electric scooter, if powered by renewable energy, is a win for the environment. It’s up to you to learn about the power sources a scooter service uses.

Conscious Consumerism

How clean electric scooters are is totally dependent on the energy source used to generate the electricity needed to charge them. As such, conscious consumerism will play a significant role in the future of these micro-mobility devices and their impact on the environment. 

As environmentally conscious consumers, we should know the source of our energy. If you don’t know how your electricity is generated, ask your electricity service provider. If your electricity comes from a clean, renewable energy source like wind, solar, or hydropower, you can feel good about riding and charging your electric scooter — or electric car.

About the Author

Josh Frisby is the founder of Electric Scooter Insider, a site that reviews and recommends the best electric scooters. He also conducts extensive research studies into the micro-mobility industry to uncover interesting insights that spark debate and increase the exposure of electric scooters to the general public.

Feature image courtesy of Marek Rucinski from Unsplash

 

You Might Also Like…

Are Bike Lanes Worth the Cost?

Seattle residents were shocked when they discovered how much two …Gemma AlexanderAugust 10, 2018

Reduce Your Carbon Footprint: Transportation
After three flat years, carbon dioxide emissions rose again in 2017, …Sarah LozanovaApril 18, 2018

Bike Benefits: 6 Reasons To Pedal Power Your Commute
What’s the one mode of transport that won’t fail you …Earth911July 22, 2015

earth911

Visit link: 

Electric Scooters: Dirty or Green Transportation?

Posted in alo, ALPHA, Citizen, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, Mop, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Electric Scooters: Dirty or Green Transportation?

How to Negotiate With a Contractor for Green Building Projects

by optimizareseositero Posted on August 22, 2019

Share this idea!

Pin0
Facebook0

0shares

If you’re planning a green renovation or remodeling project, you now have more green-friendly products and contractors available than ever before.

Although there are many important details to consider, finding the right contractor for completing the project is essential. Contractors with experience in making energy efficiency upgrades, using natural and local materials, and conserving resources will bring a lot to the table. Ideally, they will add synergy to your green home project and to make it a reality. Here are some tips for negotiating with contractors for green home projects.

Dream Green From the Start

To achieve the best results, we recommend you keep green features in mind from the project’s beginning, not merely as an afterthought. Look for contractors with an established track record of building using sustainable and recyclable materials, deep awareness of the insulation and natural lighting opportunities when remodeling, and the customer roster to prove they deliver. When you need to hire an architect or other design professionals for your project, make sure they are aware of your green project goals and that they are experienced.

If you are building an addition to your home, for example, strategically placing windows and doors can help save energy. If this isn’t planned early on, it can drive up project costs and create delays. During your walk-through with the contractor, listen to whether they make these suggestions or have to be asked. Make clear from the start you want a healthy and environmentally friendly outcome.

Do Your Homework

Although many experienced contractors will have ideas and suggestions, it is also helpful to conceptualize your project before meeting with them. Conduct research about the type of project and the materials, such as doors, window frames, or appliances involved before even the first planning session. This will help you bring specific goals to the table for the first meeting, making it more productive.

Take the time to meet several contractors, no matter how good the first one appears. Asking three contractors about the same project will produce three different approaches that may bring important issues to the surface. With those meetings behind you, pick the contractor with the best reputation who provides the most complete estimate and covers all, or at least most, of the concerns raised by the other contractors.

Consider the Long-Term Costs

Keep in mind that the upfront cost may be greater for green projects but will often save you money over time. For example, if you add insulation to the attic when finishing it out, it can reduce your heating and cooling costs for decades. Metal roofs cost more than their asphalt counterparts but are far more durable.

Consider both the project cost and potential cost savings to understand the big picture financially.

Find a Contractor With Green Renovation Experience

There are now many builders, electricians, carpenters, and even plumbers with vast knowledge and experience in completing green projects. Find a building professional with experience in the given type of project.

For example, if you want to add a graywater system to your home, find a plumber who has done this work before. Look at examples or at least photos of their work; speak with past clients and read online reviews to learn about their experience. Make sure they are licensed and insured to complete the work and that they will take care of any needed permits. There are several national certification programs that can be helpful in your search:

National Association of Home Builders (NAHB): — Certified Green Professional (CGP)
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) — LEED Accredited Professional
Green Advantage (GA) — Green Advantage Certified Practitioner (GACP)

Always Get Multiple Bids

It is typically recommended to get at least three bids for your project. It is hard to know if you are getting a fair price without shopping around. Some contractors will take different approaches to the same project, resulting in a different finished product.

The initial meeting is a great opportunity to pick their brains and get ideas. If your preferred contractor has a higher bid than others, you can ask him or her to match the price of a lower bid. Your goal is to get the best result for you, the planet, and your wallet.

Flesh Out the Details

The details can be extremely important, especially for green products.

Ask the contractor to specify what materials they will use. Whenever possible, use formaldehyde-free and recycled materials, locally and sustainably harvested wood products, nontoxic insulation, and low or no VOC finishes and adhesives. Buying these products yourself is a possible way to cut costs and ensure they have the green features you want.

Also, find out if the contractor will subcontract out some of the work. If so, research the reputation of the subcontractors as well. It’s the person doing the work who has to live up the the environmental expectations you set.

Have a Clear Contract

Make sure that the contract specifies all the important details, starting with a clear project description. Hold your contractor to their estimate, requiring they ask you before over-spending on materials or labor. The final cost of your project is your responsibility to manage and the contractor’s business to increase as much as you will allow.

Here are a few of the common questions to answer in the contract:

Who will purchase the materials and apply for needed permits?
What products will be used?
How long will it take the complete the project and is there a penalty if the project goes past the deadline?
What is the payment schedule and terms?
Is there a warranty on the work and for how long?

Make sure you get any promises the contractor makes in writing and don’t just rely on just a firm handshake. Keep your estimates, contract, and any receipts provided together both for your security and to share with a future home buyer.

 

You Might Also Like…

Infographic: Anatomy of a Green Home

Have you ever found yourself spending way more on a …Earth911July 29, 2019

6 Things to Consider Before Replacing Windows
Windows provide light, warmth, ventilation, and views of the outdoors. …Sarah LozanovaApril 2, 2019

7 Things to Consider for an Eco-Friendly Bathroom Remodel
When you’re remodeling any part of your home, most of …Shruti AgrawalDecember 20, 2016

earth911

Source – 

How to Negotiate With a Contractor for Green Building Projects

Posted in alo, ALPHA, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LG, Mop, Natural Light, ONA, organic, Oster, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How to Negotiate With a Contractor for Green Building Projects

Cutting Down on Lawn — Alternatives to Grass

by AlfredoCormier Posted on August 13, 2019

Share this idea!

Pin2
Facebook0

2shares

Lawns are green in color only, and the odds are good that you’re sick of mowing. You could save time by ignoring lawncare myths, and there are ways to reduce the water and energy you waste on your lawn, but even the most eco-friendly lawn is still a lawn.

Here are some tips for reducing the amount of the lawn in your yard even if you’re not an avid gardener.

Shrubbery

There’s a good chance that you have at least a few trees and bushes planted around the edges of your lawn. Add to the existing woody plants in your yard to create deep shrub borders. Plant native species and mulch them all the way to the drip line to reduce the need for water and protect trunks from lawnmower damage. Once established, native shrub borders can survive without supplemental water most years, and need pruning no more than once a year.

Berry Beds

Fill a raised bed that gets plenty of sun with blackberries and you’ll be rewarded with fresh fruit. Image: pixel2013, Pixabay

Raised beds create a sense of structure in the landscape that looks tidier than shrub borders. They also keep cane berries like raspberry and blackberry from spreading.

Filled with flowers or vegetables, raised beds can be just as much work as lawn. But filled with berries, all they need is sun and water and you’ll be rewarded with fresh fruit. But don’t be surprised if you get inspired to take up beekeeping to keep those harvests going.

Unmown Grasses

Ornamental grasses like this pink muhly require minimal care. Image: paulbr75, Pixabay

Lawn grass is not the only kind of grass, in fact, it is one of the least interesting or useful forms.

Ornamental grasses can be used to create sophisticated planting designs or to recreate native prairie. If you choose native species, you can free yourself from both watering and mowing, so you’ll have plenty of free time to sit back and enjoy the butterflies and other wildlife attracted to your certified wildlife habitat.

But research horticultural varieties before planting — many ornamental grasses are invasive species. If a grass doesn’t belong in your region, don’t plant it.

Ground Covers

Sempervivum, a succulent commonly known as “hens and chicks” is just one of many resilient ground covers. Image: Hans, Pixabay

There are probably areas of your lawn that don’t get very much — if any — foot traffic. For those areas, other ground covers may be more appropriate than grass, especially in shady areas. As with grasses, many ground covers can be invasive. Consider native plants like kinnikinnick or wild ginger — find out what grows in your region.

Few ground covers are as hardy as lawn grass. But clover, herbs like creeping thyme, and even moss can tolerate some foot traffic. The benefit, though, is groundcover that requires relatively little water compared to the traditional lawn.

Unplanted Areas

Although permeable pavers can reduce the amount of grass you have to deal with while still allowing rainwater to drain through the gaps, an entirely paved yard is probably too much. Gravel, on the other hand, can be a lawn substitute without making your yard look built over. Combining large areas of gravel broken up with a few drought-tolerant plants is best suited to dry climates and desert landscapes.

There’s no need to rip out your entire lawn if you don’t want to. But you can save time, energy, and water by reducing the area of your lawn. Try one or more of these strategies to chip away at the edges of your lawn. You might find yourself with a prettier yard and more time to enjoy it.

 

You Might Also Like…

Landscaping for Fire Resistance

Lately, it seems like every year is a bad year …Gemma AlexanderSeptember 17, 2018

Go Wild! How to Certify Your Backyard as Wildlife Habitat
Most of us take great pleasure in being good hosts. …Madeleine SomervilleMarch 7, 2017

Ecological Landscaping Works, Plus How To Do It Correctly
Landscaping can take a drab outdoor home environment and turn …Chase EzellSeptember 26, 2016

earth911

More: 

Cutting Down on Lawn — Alternatives to Grass

Posted in ALPHA, ATTRA, Citizen, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, horticulture, LG, Mop, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Cutting Down on Lawn — Alternatives to Grass

Is My Roof Too Shaded for Solar Panels?

by AlenaBowie Posted on August 6, 2019

Share this idea!

Pin0
Facebook0

0shares

Many people want to install solar panels but their roofs are very shaded. Is it worth it to go solar?

Obviously, solar panels produce more power when they are in direct sunlight, but they do generate some power when shaded. Here are the typical reasons for shady roof areas and how to place solar panels to take advantage of the light that is available.

Solar Orientation

It is ideal to install the solar panels on a south-facing roof.

When the panels point either west or east, they will not get as much direct sun during part of the day. If the panels face east, they will produce a lot of energy in the morning but very little in the late afternoon. The reverse is true if they face west. It is not recommended to install solar panels facing north as they will receive almost no direct sunlight.

To determine the generation loss due to orientation, use the PVWatts calculator tool and edit the azimuth field, which represents the angle at which your solar panels must be placed. 

Trees 

Although trees are wonderful for so many reasons, they are not necessarily compatible with solar panels unless they are planted on the north side of the home.

Trees on the south side can be most problematic because they can block midday sun, which is very important for overall power production. Trees can also prevent passive solar gains that can keep your heating energy use down in the winter.

There are a few things to keep in mind with trees. They could shade your solar panels more in the colder months when the sun is at a lower angle (especially if you live farther north). It is also important to consider the type of trees and how much they will grow.

Some smaller trees can be pruned to keep them small while some trees are just immense. Deciduous trees will shade your panels less in the winter months than conifers because they lose their leaves. However, even branch shade does have an impact on energy production.

Dormers, Gables, and Chimneys 

These roof features are another culprit for solar electricity production. Aside from strategically placing solar panels where they aren’t shaded, there are few ways to get around these architectural obstacles.

An experienced solar installer will be able to place the panels where they receive the least amount of shading. Unfortunately, this might limit the size of the array.

Other Locations for Solar Panels

Keep in mind that you can install panels on a garage, as an awning, on a carport, or even on a trellis. This will probably increase the installation cost, especially if you need to purchase materials to reinforce the trellis or carport. Yet, these structures can be useful solar locations and provide other benefits. 

Join a Community Solar Farm

Community solar gardens or farms are owned by a group of people or a company. They allow a group of households and businesses to use the renewable energy that off-site solar panels generate without installing the solar panels on their properties. Solar farms are ideal for renters, apartment dwellers, low-income households, and people with shaded roofs.

Some states have legislation in place making this arrangement more feasible and economical. Currently, Massachusetts, New York, Minnesota, and Colorado are the the top states for community solar farms. But 15 other states also have policies supporting community solar projects, and in several other states, utility providers and other groups are working to offer community solar. If you live in one of these states and have a shaded roof, joining a community solar farm might be a great option.

 

You Might Also Like…

Earth911 Conscious-Shopping Guide: Best Solar Panels

Technological advances have transformed the solar energy industry in recent …Sarah LozanovaMay 14, 2019

Can I Afford a Solar System for My Home?
Have you considered installing a solar power system on your …Sarah LozanovaJanuary 31, 2019

Can’t Add Solar Panels to Your Roof? Join a Community Solar Farm
Solar energy development has skyrocketed in recent years, but many …Sarah LozanovaApril 10, 2018

earth911

See the article here:  

Is My Roof Too Shaded for Solar Panels?

Posted in ALPHA, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LG, Mop, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, solar panels, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Is My Roof Too Shaded for Solar Panels?

The Koch brothers are funding Facebook’s newest fact-checking partner

by MattieNsk58774 Posted on April 29, 2019

Is Facebook trying to solve its fake news problem by partnering with … climate deniers?

Last week, social media giant Facebook announced that it would be partnering with CheckYourFact.com, the fact-checking offshoot of the Koch-funded, right-leaning news outlet The Daily Caller. The fact-checking site will help provide third-party oversight of Facebook’s news content, including stories about global warming.

The Check Your Fact site says it is “non-partisan” and “loyal to neither people nor parties,” describing itself as an “editorially independent” subsidiary from The Daily Caller, though it receives funding from both The Daily Caller and the Daily Caller News Foundation. The Daily Caller was founded by Fox News political analyst Tucker Carlson, who is known for hosting climate deniers on his show.

Critics say the deal say the partnership is a case of a fox guarding the hen house (Or, at least, Fox News guarding the greenhouse). “It is truly disturbing to hear that Facebook, already known to be a dubious organization with an ethically challenged CEO, is partnering with ‘Daily Caller,’ which is essentially a climate change-denying Koch Brothers front group masquerading as a media outlet,” leading climatologist Michael Mann told E&E News. “If they fail to cease and desist in outsourcing their ‘fact-checking’ to this bad faith, agenda-driven outlet, they will face serious repercussions.”

Facebook did not respond to Grist’s request for comment.

But is Check Your Fact really as bad as all that? In February 2018 the site was found to be “compliant or partially compliant” with the Poynter’s International Fact Checking Network Board’s standards, though the site was placed under review in November for not clearly listing its funders. Recently, Check Your Fact looked at President Trump’s claims that wind turbines cause cancer, and found them to be false. However, their statement also included quotes from National Wind Watch, an anti-wind advocacy group.

Facebook has contracted with several organizations to identify factually disputed stories, but its relationship with fact checkers has long been rocky. In 2017, several journalists expressed concerns about the company’s lack of transparency, saying the Facebook’s fact-checking effort had not been effective. More recently, both the Associated Press and Snopes.com, cut ties with the company, with Snopes’ managing editor saying she felt Facebook essentially used them for “crisis PR.”

This isn’t the first time Facebook has entrusted its fact-checking with a website associated with climate denial: In the fall of 2017, Facebook named the right-wing, partisan Weekly Standard as a fact-checking partner. According to IFCN officials, the organization does not take partisanship of the news outlet into account when verifying an organization, only partisanship of the fact-checking itself.

“[U]ltimately, it’s important that people trust the fact-checkers making these calls,” wrote Facebook product manager Tessa Lyons as part of the company’s Hard questions series. “While we work with the International Fact-Checking Network to approve all our partners and make sure they have high standards of accuracy, fairness and transparency, we continue to face accusations of bias. Which has left people asking, in today’s world, is it possible to have a set of fact-checkers that are widely recognized as objective?”

More:

The Koch brothers are funding Facebook’s newest fact-checking partner

Posted in Accent, alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Koch brothers are funding Facebook’s newest fact-checking partner

Beto O’Rourke is running for president. Now about that environmental record …

by CiaraPikegestwd Posted on March 14, 2019

Subscribe to The Beacon

After a handful of trips across the country, a few shaky Facebook live streams, 10 angst-ridden, stream-of-consciousness Medium posts, at least one trip to the dentist, and a Vanity Fair cover about wanting to be “in it,” Beto O’Rourke is now … in it.

Last night, the former congressman from Texas confirmed to an El Paso TV station that he is running for the White House, and then made the official announcement on Twitter this morning.

In the launch video, O’Rourke called voters “the last great hope of Earth” and said that we’re in a “moment of maximum peril and maximum potential.”

“Perhaps, most importantly of all, because our very existence depends on it, we can unleash the ingenuity and creativity of millions of Americans who want to ensure that we squarely confront the challenge of climate change before it’s too late,” he said.

So what does his presidential bid mean for the environment and tackling climate change? It’s complicated. First, the good news: O’Rourke is no climate denier. Even in deep-red Texas, O’Rourke, who had no name recognition nationally until he launched a grassroots, seat-of-your-pants campaign against Senator Ted Cruz in 2017, was clear from the get-go that climate change is real, that it’s happening now and humans are driving it. O’Rourke also sports a lifetime score of 95 from the League of Conservation Voters.

In his unsuccessful campaign to unseat Cruz, climate change was rarely part of the discussion. Over two debates, Cruz and O’Rourke clashed over energy and climate just once. In response to a question about ExxonMobil acknowledging climate change, O’Rourke said, “Three hundred years after the Enlightenment, we should be able to listen to the scientists.”

In Texas, campaigns are awash in money from Big Oil, and his campaign was no different. Last year, he was taken off a list of politicians who’d signed a “No Fossil Fuel Money” pledge, after he received $430,000 from people working in the oil and gas industry. Three-fourths of the donations were larger than $200 and 29 of them were from oil and gas executives.

When he traveled to parts of Texas dependant on fossil fuel extraction during his Senate campaign, O’Rourke promoted fracking as fundamental to national security. In the heart of the Permian Basin, for instance, he told the Midland Reporter-Telegram that he didn’t want the United States to be dependent on other countries for energy but that fracking should be done “in a responsible, safe way that does not jeopardize the environment.” At a debate with Cruz, he called the decision between renewables and fossil fuels “a false choice.”

Environmental advocates have also been troubled by a handful of votes in favor of the oil and gas industry during his time in Congress. O’Rourke was one of few Democrats in the House to vote to lift the ban on oil exports in 2015. And he backed a Republican bill to fast-track natural gas exports and opposed a bill to limit offshore drilling.

Maybe this campaign will be different. There’s the prominent mention of climate change in the launch video, along with his support for the Green New Deal. In an interview with BuzzFeed last month, O’Rourke said that it’s “the best proposal that I’ve seen to ensure that this planet does not warm another 2 degrees C, after which we may lose the ability to live in places like El Paso.”

Read More – 

Beto O’Rourke is running for president. Now about that environmental record …

Posted in Accent, alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Beto O’Rourke is running for president. Now about that environmental record …

Google, Facebook, and Microsoft sponsored a conference that promoted climate change denial

by jayklug95681337 Posted on January 25, 2019

Subscribe to The Beacon

This story was originally published by Mother Jones and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Google, Facebook, and Microsoft have publicly acknowledged the dangers of global warming, but last week they all sponsored a conference that promoted climate change denial to young libertarians.

All three tech companies were sponsors of LibertyCon, the annual convention of the libertarian group Students for Liberty, which took place in Washington, D.C. Google was a platinum sponsor, ponying up $25,000, and Facebook and Microsoft each contributed $10,000 as gold sponsors. The donations put the tech companies in the top tier of the event’s backers. But the donations also put the firms in company with some of the event’s other sponsors, which included three groups known for their work attacking climate change science and trying to undermine efforts to reduce carbon emissions.

Among the most notable was the CO2 Coalition, a group founded in 2015 to spread the “good news” about a greenhouse gas whose increase in the atmosphere is linked to potentially catastrophic climate change. The coalition is funded by conservative foundations that have backed other climate change denial efforts. These include the Mercer Family Foundation, which in recent years has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to right-wing think tanks engaged in climate change denialism, and the Charles Koch Institute, the charitable arm of one of the brothers behind Koch Industries, the oil and gas behemoth.

In the LibertyCon exhibit hall, the CO2 Coalition handed out brochures that said its goal is to “explain how our lives and our planet Earth will be improved by additional atmospheric carbon dioxide.” One brochure claimed that “more carbon dioxide will help everyone, including future generations of our families” and that the “recent increase in CO2 levels has had a measurable, positive effect on plant life,” apparently because the greenhouse gas will make plants grow faster.

In a Saturday presentation, Caleb Rossiter, a retired statistics professor and a member of the coalition, gave a presentation titled “Let’s Talk About Not Talking: Should There Be ‘No Debate’ that Industrial Carbon Dioxide is Causing Climate Catastrophe?” In his presentation, Rossiter told the assembled students that the impact of climate change on weather patterns has been vastly exaggerated. “There has been no increase in storms, in intensity or frequency,” he said. “The data don’t show a worrisome trend.”

He insisted that when he hears the news that carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are rising, “I’m cheering!” That’s because, he said, carbon dioxide “is a fertilizer” that has made Africa greener and increased food production there, reducing human misery.

Rossiter also claimed that carbon dioxide emissions correlate with wealth and that the greenhouse gas “improves life expectancy” because poor countries that start burning fossil fuels have a more consistent power supply and can then clean up their water. “I’m happy when carbon dioxide is up, because it means poverty is down,” he declared.

“I come not to bury your carbon but to praise it,” he concluded.

Rossiter’s presentation puts him on the far fringes of the climate denial world. Not even Exxon is trying to make such arguments anymore. And it’s a long way from what Google, Facebook, and Microsoft have said about the dangers of carbon dioxide; all three companies have committed to reducing their own carbon footprints. Microsoft has pledged to cut carbon emissions by 75 percent by 2030. Google claims to be committed to a “zero carbon” future and is aggressively pursuing renewable energy sources for its operations to reduce its carbon footprint and help combat climate change. And Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg criticized President Donald Trump after he announced that the United States would withdraw from the Paris climate accord, writing: “Stopping climate change is something we can only do as a global community, and we have to act together before it’s too late.”

The presence of the tech sponsors at a libertarian conference is not itself unusual, as governments around the globe move to try to regulate social media and online privacy. Tech companies see libertarians as natural allies in the fight against regulation. Indeed, Google sponsored two different sessions at the conference, one on why “permissionless innovation” needs to be defended and another on whether the government will “continue to let the Internet be awesome.” But the companies’ underwriting of a conference with a climate denier on the schedule shows the hazards of trying to advance a policy agenda through interest groups without also supporting their fringe elements.

The CO2 Coalition wasn’t the only group sponsoring LibertyCon that is known for its work undermining efforts to combat climate change. Along with Facebook and Microsoft, the Heartland Institute was also a gold sponsor of the event. Heartland is a longtime player in industry-funded efforts to undermine climate science and fend off efforts to reduce carbon emissions. The conservative Heritage Foundation, which pushed the Trump administration to withdraw from the Paris climate accords and has long featured experts who argue that global warming is a myth, was also a sponsor.

A Facebook spokesperson responded to questions about its sponsorship of LibertyCon by sending a link to its political engagement page, which says: “Sometimes we support events that highlight Internet and social media issues,” and features a long list of third-party groups it has worked with in the past. He noted that LibertyCon met its criteria for support and cited the number of sessions unrelated to climate change.

A spokesperson from Google defended the company’s LibertyCon sponsorship, saying: “Every year, we sponsor organizations from across the political spectrum to promote strong technology laws. As we make clear in our public policy transparency report, Google’s sponsorship or collaboration with a third party organization doesn’t mean that we endorse the organization’s entire agenda or agree with other speakers or sponsors.”

On Wednesday, Microsoft said in a statement: “Our commitment to sustainability is not altered or affected by our membership or sponsorship of an organization. We work with many groups on technology policy issues and do not expect or anticipate that any organization’s agenda will align to ours in all policy areas.”

Source: 

Google, Facebook, and Microsoft sponsored a conference that promoted climate change denial

Posted in Accent, alo, Anchor, Casio, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Google, Facebook, and Microsoft sponsored a conference that promoted climate change denial

Inside the bill that set the ‘strongest clean energy requirement in the nation’

by IlanaSettles Posted on December 29, 2018

Invest in nonprofit journalism today.Donate now and every gift will be matched through 12/31.

This story was originally published by CityLab and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Washington, D.C., is positioning itself on the climate policy fast track. The District of Columbia city council voted unanimously last week to approve an expansive climate bill requiring utility providers to generate 100 percent of their energy supply from renewable sources by 2032. If D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser signs the legislation as expected, the provisions will put the nation’s capital on a faster, formally pledged timeline toward cutting utility emissions than any U.S. state. (Hawaii and California have both pledged state-wide goals of 100 percent renewable energy for electricity by 2045.)

While several smaller cities have already reached similar 100-percent renewable energy targets, Washington, D.C., is by far the largest city to make such a commitment. And that’s not all that’s in the bill. Together, the provisions were dubbed the “strongest clean energy requirement in the nation,” by Mark Rodeffer, D.C. Sierra Club chapter chair.

So what’s in D.C.’s bill? And what can the rest of us learn from it, at a time when cities and states are racing to fill the gap left by federal regulators to slow climate change?

What the bill regulates: Electricity and some transportation

D.C.’s new bill is intended to dramatically decrease emissions from one of the most common sources, electricity, by ratcheting up the requirements on utility providers. D.C.’s current law already mandates that utility providers derive 50 percent of their energy supply from renewable sources by 2032, with 5 percent carved out for solar. The new bill doubles these figures to 100 percent renewables by 2032 with 10 percent solar by 2041.

Buildings account for 74 percent of D.C.’s carbon emissions. And the bill also establishes a separate program to set benchmarks for energy efficiency for the largest buildings in the city, those with more than 10,000 square feet of gross floor area. The specific standards, however, have not yet been set. According to Cliff Majersik, the Institute for Market Transformation executive director who worked on the bill, D.C. will become the first U.S. jurisdiction “to require a broad swath of existing buildings to improve their whole-building energy performance.”

The bill also tackles another major contributor of emissions: transportation. While the bill won’t do anything to regulate residents’ private transportation choices, it will regulate the city’s own contributions: By 2045, all public transportation and privately owned vehicle fleets in D.C. will have to produce zero emissions.

How would the bill be implemented?

The burden falls on utility companies to meet benchmarks for renewable electricity — or pay a price. Every year, the city sets renewable energy standards for companies to hit that increase incrementally until they reach 100 percent in 2032. What happens if companies don’t meet those standards? The city requires electricity suppliers to to make compliance payments into D.C.’s Renewable Energy Development Fund.

There are other guaranteed revenue sources to fund other parts of the bill. Utility companies serving D.C. are already required to collect fees from customers who use natural gas and electricity. These fees are put toward a fund for D.C.’s energy efficiency efforts. But this bill temporarily raises those per-unit rates and creates a new fee on home heating and fuel oil to raise even more money for energy efficiency. (D.C. residents who make under a certain income, with the amount dependent on household size, will still be eligible for utilities discounts.)

Helping low-income residents transition to clean energy

Some of the revenue from increased fees will be used to help low-income communities adapt.

“Communities that have done the least to cause climate change [are] disproportionately bearing the burden of climate change,” Judith Howell, a member of the labor union 32BJ SEIU, said in a statement. “Working people in the U.S. and around the world will be extremely vulnerable to those changes.”

Thirty percent of the additional revenue will be put aside for programs like weatherization and bill assistance for low-income households, as well as job training in energy efficiency fields. At least $3 million annually will also be allocated toward energy efficiency upgrades in affordable housing buildings.

The criticism that watered down one requirement for utilities

In November, local energy company Pepco ran some misleading ads on Facebook urging D.C. residents to “act now” and “act boldly” to achieve a “sustainable vision.” When users clicked through to a petition, what it was asking was that its customers oppose a provision of the bill requiring Pepco to use long-term contracts for renewable energy.

WAMU’s Jacob Fenston wrote in November:

“Pepco wants residents to sound off on one small piece of the legislation: a requirement that Pepco purchase renewable energy under long-term contracts. According to the DOEE analysis, this provision would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 8 percent by 2032.”

Majersik told CityLab that the long-term contract provision Pepco opposed was stripped from the bill, but may be proposed as part of a new bill in 2019. Ultimately, Pepco supported the revised bill and released a statement calling the legislation an “important step toward advancing the cause of clean energy.”

Among the primary supporters of the bill was the D.C. Climate Coalition, which included over 110 advocacy organizations, faith groups, unions, consumer advocate organizations, and D.C. businesses.

Camila Thorndike, D.C. campaign director at the CCAN Action Fund said in a press release: “With the passage of this bill, we’re taking the power back from President Trump and taking control of our energy future.”

Dig this article?Support nonprofit journalism

. Help us raise $50,000 by December 31! A little bit goes a long way.

Donate today and your gift will be matched

.

Original article: 

Inside the bill that set the ‘strongest clean energy requirement in the nation’

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Inside the bill that set the ‘strongest clean energy requirement in the nation’

A climate denial video has 6 million views. Facebook doesn’t care.

by dconstantine1971 Posted on July 31, 2018

A two-minute video attacking the scientific consensus on climate change — made by infamous denier Marc Morano — is going viral. While the Guardian has already thoroughly debunked the content of the video, it’s still making the rounds on social media. On Tuesday, it had racked up over 100,000 shares and 6.3 million views on Facebook.

Even though the social media site has bragged about hiring third-party fact-checkers in many countries to cope with its fake-news problem, its approach to fake science remains obscure. “I don’t know if they are even fact-checking science,” says Gordon Pennycook, a professor at Canada’s University of Regina who studies fake news and political bias.

John Cook, who focuses on climate misinformation as a professor of cognitive science at George Mason University, says he hasn’t heard of the social media giant flagging any climate denial content. “Facebook’s fact-checking algorithms are a bit of a black box,” he tells Grist via email. (The social media site did not respond to a request for comment.)

Instead, Facebook seems to be taking aim at lower-hanging fruit, by limiting the spread of sensational stories from websites known to peddle in falsehoods like Infowars and YourNewsWire. “There’s a wide world of B.S., unfortunately,” Pennycook says.

But while fact-checkers focus on falsehoods akin to “Pizzagate,” fake science stories — which have the potential to influence public policy, health, and the future of the earth — can spread widely. Anti-vaccine groups run rampant on Facebook, with hundreds of thousands of followers exposed to misinformation about health risks of immunization. And the Flat Earth Society (don’t get me started), has more than 150,000 followers, although some of them (hopefully) follow the page as a joke.

Facebook can point to one example of it fact-checking science: Earlier this year, the social-media platform blogged that it had stopped the spread of a viral story about ending strokes by pricking a finger with a needle. But it’s hard to square this tiny victory with the other science misinformation circulating every day on the platform.

In 2016, an investigation by DeSmog found that the most-shared climate article throughout the year was a hoax piece that — like Morano’s video — critiqued the 97-percent scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change. This is bad news, especially considering that psychologists have found that attacking consensus is one of the best ways to sow doubt.

Worse, some of Facebook’s third-party fact-checkers are known climate deniers themselves. The Weekly Standard, which was announced as a fact-checking partner in December, has called climate science “Dadaist science” and has critiqued climate action. The fossil fuel-funded Heritage Foundation has espoused climate change denial for decades — and is now partnered with Facebook to investigate possible “liberal bias” in its operations. As Joe Romm writes for ThinkProgress: “This is indeed the fox guarding the henhouse.”

But even if Facebook initiated substantial science fact-checking, it might not be able to stem the flow of denial. Researchers last year found that being “debunked” simply caused many conspiracy theorists to double down on their claims. And since these misinformers inhabit online echo chambers, they rarely see pieces getting debunked anyway.

Still, Cook thinks that Facebook should work on fact-checking science content on its platform. “They can’t just say they’re engineers and they’re absolved of responsibility,” he tells Grist. But he also has another, novel idea for preventing the spread of misinformation: a technique called “inoculation.”

While we might not be able to change the minds of current deniers, Cook explains, we can prevent others from being taken in by their claims. By giving individuals a sample of misinformation — and then explaining the psychology behind it — he believes communicators can “neutralize misinformation” before it starts to spread. “If you explain the techniques used to mislead people, they’re no longer influenced by them,” he says.

It’s ironic that the idea of inoculation, which anti-vaxxers have disparaged for years, could serve as a way to fight the very misinformation that they spread. But any large-scale effort to guard against climate denial or other false science will take a long time, and a lot of education. Like it or not, we need climate action now — and Facebook is still part of the problem.

Jump to original: 

A climate denial video has 6 million views. Facebook doesn’t care.

Posted in alo, Anchor, Bragg, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Wiley | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A climate denial video has 6 million views. Facebook doesn’t care.