Tag Archives: solar

Here’s what 3 Newark residents had to say about the city’s lead crisis

Subscribe to The Beacon

Four years after lead was discovered in Flint’s drinking water, a similar public health crisis is playing out in New Jersey’s most populous city, Newark.

Residents of Newark say over the past year and a half, top city and state officials assured them that their water supply was safe. But as early as 2016, state-run tests that showed elevated lead levels at local schools.

The Natural Resources Defense Council, together with the Newark Education Workers’ Caucus, filed a lawsuit against the city in June, accusing it of violating federal safe drinking water laws. The suit alleges Newark both failed to treat its water properly to prevent lead from leaching off old service pipes into residents’ drinking water and failed to notify residents about the elevated lead levels.

For most of 2018, Newark’s website read: “NEWARK’S WATER IS ABSOLUTELY SAFE TO DRINK,” according to the New York Times. Since the lawsuit was filed, the city has sprung into action, giving away 40,000 water filters across the city of 285,000 people and telling parents their children should not drink the water.

The situation has drawn parallels to the Flint water crisis. “The actual facts of what happened in Flint may not be the exact same, but the overall arc of what happened is,” Mae Wu, an attorney and water expert at the NRDC, told Grist.

The revelation of this potentially widening public health crisis has angered many Newark residents. Here are three community members’ experiences, as told to Grist reporter Paola Rosa-Aquino. Their statements have been edited for length and clarity.


Though the city of Newark is distributing water filters, like these, for residents to mitigate lead levels in their homes, residents say there are not enough for those who need them. Image courtesy of Shakima Thomas

Debra Salters, community activist

I live in a building in the East Ward. We didn’t get water filters. The people who had something to say about it — the activists — we were turned away. We’re actually meeting with our building’s owners next week to find out what the situation is and if they can get the water tested.

Even now, not everyone who lives here knows about the lead in the water. More and more people are finding out, from family members out of state and other cities. Not only are we drinking the water, we’re bathing in it. We’re brushing our teeth in it. We’re washing our hair with it. It’s affecting our entire life here and no one seems to care, until the lawsuit, until they were made to care.

None of the top officials have really done anything to make the public aware of the public health crisis. They denied there was a problem when we, the citizens, were digging up information and bringing it to them to make sure. First, we found out about the lead in schools, and they tried to tell us the water was OK to drink at home. If you’re saying the water is not good in the schools, then how is it fine in our homes, if it’s all coming from the same source? We were shooed away like gnats at a barbecue.

Newark Mayor Ras Baraka (left) looks on as Senior Aide Andrea Mason (center) speaks to residents at a town hall concerning the city’s lead problem.Image courtesy of Shakima Thomas

Yvette Jordan, teacher and member of Newark Education Workers Caucus

My concern as well as other educators who I have spoken with, of course, is our students as well as small children and those most vulnerable, including elderly and women who are pregnant. We felt we represented a cross-section of our city and especially of those who would be impacted. A couple of us who were homeowners or parents of small children — we felt emotional about this. We could really speak to it with some credibility. My own home’s water was found to be 42.2 parts per billion which is over the federal threshold for lead.

Our teachers’ group was approached by the Natural Resource Defense Council and they asked if we could join them in a lawsuit against the City of Newark. We asked, “Why?” They said, “Well, your water actually rivals Flint, Michigan.” We were alarmed. We said we’d join them.

I mentioned it in my classroom with my students. Some students have heard something and others don’t know what I’m talking about. I feel it’s a failure of public trust in coming forward and saying exactly what is happening.

I think a lot of times people who are affiliated with those who are in power try to downplay what is going on. They try to say to those who are speaking out about it are being irresponsible, that we shouldn’t say anything because it will scare the public. Well, guess what? They should be scared.

Shakima Thomas’s son, 4, bathes in water in Newark, New Jersey.Image courtesy of Shakima Thomas

Shakima Thomas, social worker

I pay for water and it’s really confusing for me that I have to pay for toxic water. What I’m paying is not adding up to the service that I’m getting. I don’t appreciate it, especially as a hard working person. Even as a mom, I have to protect my son, who’s a four-year-old. He’s okay and doesn’t have any elevated levels of lead in his bloodstream, but this still is a public health disaster.

It’s people’s lives. Who wants to have lead in your bloodstream? Who wants that? None of us. We were just exposed to this toxic water. It’s horrible. I think it should be a federal class action lawsuit against this city. That’s what I would think. And I think that we should be reimbursed from the time that administration knew about the lead in the water up until now. From 2016 to now, I feel as though my fees for water should be waived, because I was buying poison, and it wasn’t even consensual. I’m not just going to go out there willingly purchasing poison. I’m just not gonna do that. So, that’s what makes this even more of a scandal.

The mayor keeps saying that this isn’t like Flint. It is the same as Flint in the way that they tried to cover it up. It’s the same thing. We were victimized by this administration. They gamble with our health. They put politics first before justice.

Original post:  

Here’s what 3 Newark residents had to say about the city’s lead crisis

Posted in alo, Anchor, Casio, Citizen, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s what 3 Newark residents had to say about the city’s lead crisis

On the Future – Martin Rees

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

On the Future

Prospects for Humanity

Martin Rees

Genre: Science & Nature

Price: $13.99

Publish Date: October 16, 2018

Publisher: Princeton University Press

Seller: Princeton University Press


A provocative and inspiring look at the future of humanity and science from world-renowned scientist and bestselling author Martin Rees Humanity has reached a critical moment. Our world is unsettled and rapidly changing, and we face existential risks over the next century. Various outcomes—good and bad—are possible. Yet our approach to the future is characterized by short-term thinking, polarizing debates, alarmist rhetoric, and pessimism. In this short, exhilarating book, renowned scientist and bestselling author Martin Rees argues that humanity’s prospects depend on our taking a very different approach to planning for tomorrow. The future of humanity is bound to the future of science and hinges on how successfully we harness technological advances to address our challenges. If we are to use science to solve our problems while avoiding its dystopian risks, we must think rationally, globally, collectively, and optimistically about the long term. Advances in biotechnology, cybertechnology, robotics, and artificial intelligence—if pursued and applied wisely—could empower us to boost the developing and developed world and overcome the threats humanity faces on Earth, from climate change to nuclear war. At the same time, further advances in space science will allow humans to explore the solar system and beyond with robots and AI. But there is no “Plan B” for Earth—no viable alternative within reach if we do not care for our home planet. Rich with fascinating insights into cutting-edge science and technology, this accessible book will captivate anyone who wants to understand the critical issues that will define the future of humanity on Earth and beyond.

See the original article here: 

On the Future – Martin Rees

Posted in alo, Anchor, Cyber, FF, GE, ONA, PUR, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on On the Future – Martin Rees

What is the Impact of Voting on the Environment?

With the close of the midterm elections, many are glad to end the discussion on voting. With the constant barrage of political ads on TV and even via text message, the next proposition or candidate is the last thing on many voters? minds.

Even though election fever has subsided, one of the often-forgotten pieces of elections is the environmental impact of voting. Our society gets so caught up in policy and candidates that we fail to think about the impact that the physical process of voting has on the world around us.

How Does Voting Affect the Environment?

Almost all states use some form of paper ballot. There are only five states that run their elections without paper ballots ? Louisiana, Georgia, South Carolina, New Jersey, and Delaware. There are also nine other states that use a combination of both paper ballots and electronic machines ? Pennsylvania, Texas, Kansas, Florida, Tennessee, Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, and Mississippi.

Although the most secure, paper ballots generate plenty of waste. From the envelopes used for mail-in ballots to the physical ballots themselves, an election is a very paper-intensive project. After an election, ballots are stored for about 22 months, at which point local authorities can dispose of them, usually by shredding.

While it may not seem like a lot of waste, in the 2014 midterm election, there were over 83 million ballots counted. Current projections for the 2018 midterms put that figure in the 114 million range. And the examples above only include midterms. Turnout in presidential elections is generally much higher and local city elections happen all the time. Therefore, every year we are forced to scrap and attempt to recycle millions of pounds of paper, adding to the 71.8 million tons of paper waste that the US generates each year.

Are Electronic Voting Machines Any Better?

Some argue that electronic voting machines can have a positive environmental impact. While this is true regarding paper waste, there are a few important caveats with electronic voting machines:

-??????? Electronic voting machines need power. Unless they run on solar power, they would still be using resources.

-??????? With the pace that technology advances, these devices will become quickly outdated or need to be replaced, thus generating e-waste. In the United States, we already scrap about 400 million units of consumer electronics every year.

-??????? The simple act of driving to the nearest polling place likely does more environmental damage that the ballot you cast. Unless voters are able to walk or bike to the polls, they are still burning fuel and generating carbon dioxide to reach the ballot box.

What is the Best Option for the Environment?

Other than cutting down on paper waste, which can only be seen as a positive, electronic voting machines do not represent a large step forward for the environment. Coupled with the fact that electronic voting machines are not seen as secure, electronic voting machines do not seem like the right answer.

The most environmentally friendly form of voting would be to vote via the internet. Voters would not have to rely on paper ballots, drive to the nearest polling station, or use any devices other than the ones they already own. Moreover, even though 29 states have laws that allow you take time off work to vote, internet voting would reduce the transaction cost of participation and have a positive impact on turnout.

That said, the security technology is simply not there yet for a country as large as the United States and likely will not be for some time. With such high stakes, it is not a risk the country can afford to take. Estonia does have an e-voting system that has been in place since 2005, but it is a country of only about 1 million eligible voters with a national ID card system. Even then, a 2014 team at the University of Michigan found that interfering with Estonia?s election is possible, even though it may not have happened yet.

Therefore, it appears that until the technology is created, we are stuck with the traditional paper ballot methods that have been around since ancient Roman times. Hopefully with the rapid pace by which technology advances, one day soon we will have a voting system that maximizes both efficiency and care for the environment.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

View original post here:

What is the Impact of Voting on the Environment?

Posted in alo, bigo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Safer, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What is the Impact of Voting on the Environment?

3 climate winners (and losers) from the California midterms

Subscribe to The Beacon

Ever since President Donald Trump began rolling back climate efforts, environmentalists have pinned their hopes on California — and on Election Day, they weren’t disappointed. Well, mostly.

There was a ton on the ballot in California: Voters had to decipher confusing initiatives concerning farm animal space requirements, rent control, and even a proposal to perpetually stay on daylight saving time. And many of the voters’ choices have implications for the climate.

Overall, the recent election suggests that voters and politicians in the state continue to embrace their role as the keepers of the (green) flame. But there were a few surprising exceptions. To cut through that tangle, here are three environmental-policy winners and three losers from the California midterms.


Winners

The solar industry

Leadership — both in the governor’s mansion, and the statehouse where Democrats maintained a strong majority — matters when it comes to the robustness of a state’s renewables industry, and it’s looking mighty sunny for solar in California. California has picked renewable energy, especially solar, as its primary tool in forging a carbon-free future, and that’s not going to change. There probably won’t be much difference between the environmental policies of outgoing Governor Jerry Brown and Governor-elect Gavin Newsom (Grist wrote more on Newsom when he was all-but-elected in the primary). Also winning: Tesla, General Motors and other electric automakers. Brown started policies to boost electric cars and Newsom is likely to double down on those efforts.

Bikers and bus riders

California voters defeated an effort to repeal an existing gas tax while at the same time approving $6 billion in bonds to build affordable housing. Both decisions will likely nudge people to drive less. The gas tax makes driving more expensive and provides money for transit and infrastructure; and opening up new affordable housing options could allow more people to live in areas where walking, biking, and public transit are an option.

Climate skeptics

Even though the state has a deeply liberal reputation, big sections of California are Trumpy, conservative, or some other shade of red. The state will be sending at least a half-dozen (we’ll update as the numbers come in) representatives  to the U.S. House who routinely thwart climate policy. They include Representative Duncan Hunter (California’s 50th District), who was recently indicted on charges of fraudulently spending $250,000 in campaign contributions on vacations and shopping sprees. “Is there human-caused climate change?” Hunter asked, rhetorically. “I don’t buy that.” (What he allegedly does buy are video games, golfing clothes, Steelers tickets, and lots of alcohol, according to his indictment.)

Losers

The Central Valley

California voters rejected Proposition 3, a bond measure that would have paid to improve dams, provide water to families with dry wells, and preserve wildlife areas — mostly in the state’s rural Central Valley. Californians rarely see a bond that they don’t love, but this one — put on the ballot by a coalition of farmers, anti-poverty advocates, and environmentalists — shriveled up and died like an unwatered almond tree in a drought. Some environmental groups opposed it because it would have given a lot of money to the dams and canals that keep agribusiness alive.

Oil companies

Governor Brown made it a point to include petroleum interests when bargaining over environmental policy, and even got the powerful Western States Petroleum Association to support his cap-and-trade bill. Governor-elect Gavin Newsom has signaled that he’ll be more antagonistic to oil companies.

Climate skeptics

No, this is not a typo: Climate skeptics were losers as well as winners. Those who won were the usual suspects — lots of incumbents in politically “safe” districts. But in toss-up races, climate became an important issue for candidates. The votes are still being counted (and we will update this, too), but it looks like Democrats will pick up at least one seat in the U.S. House formerly held by climate deniers. Representative Darrell Issa, who got a “Climate Change Denier Award” from the League of Conservation Voters, decided he wouldn’t even bother running in his coastal district north of San Diego. He’ll be replaced by an environmental lawyer, Mike Levin, to represent California’s 49th District.

Link:  

3 climate winners (and losers) from the California midterms

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 3 climate winners (and losers) from the California midterms

Survey Results: Solar Panels on Your Home?

earth911

Continue at source:  

Survey Results: Solar Panels on Your Home?

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Survey Results: Solar Panels on Your Home?

Tom Steyer and the link between hate groups and climate denial

Subscribe to The Beacon

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

Before Tom Steyer was a high-profile figure calling for the president’s impeachment, before the attacks directed at him escalated from name-calling to threats and violence, and before the president demeaned him as a “crazed & stumbling lunatic,” the Democratic donor was familiar with being a target for the extreme right because of his prominent work in climate change advocacy.

Last week, Steyer learned he was the intended recipient of one of the 13 bombs mailed to prominent critics of President Donald Trump. It was a violent escalation of attacks on the billionaire hedge fund manager and philanthropist from those that I had observed early in 2015. At that time, he surpassed Al Gore as the most hated environmentalist in conservative America after spending millions advancing pro-climate candidates in the midterms.

In the days after the attempted bombing, Trump lashed out at Steyer for a critical interview he had with CNN. Then came the shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, which sharpened the national conversation about the connection between extreme rhetoric and violent actions. Republican defenders of Trump have dismissed the relationship, although there has been a surge in racist and anti-Semitic attacks since he took office.

The link between hate groups and climate denial is complex and anecdotal at best, with little research examining the overlap between the two. But there is enough anecdotal experience to prompt prominent figures who study and advance science and policy to see a connection. In an interview with Mother Jones, Steyer said he sees the intolerance and hyperpartisanship that has marked the GOP as fundamentally connected with the party’s “willingness to directly lie” on climate change science.

“Climate change was really one of the seminal points for the Republicans because they decided they could straight-up lie,” he said in a phone interview. “When you look at the kind of violent and dehumanizing rhetoric that the president has indulged in, it’s entirely consistent with the idea that there is no cost to lying, there is no cost to really attacking the basic interest of the American people. So I think climate was the template.”

These questions about tensions concerning the climate change debate are not as well understood or explicitly drawn as the immigration debate, where George Soros is charged in coded language with pulling all the strings in a vast global conspiracy, as the New York Times reported, to “undermine the established order and a proponent of diluting the white, Christian nature of their societies through immigration.”

But the right’s denial of climate change science nonetheless repeats many of the same patterns that have appeared in other extremist targets, from guns to immigration to abortion. These patterns include the appropriation of Nazi or anti-Semitic imagery, the demonization of funders and prominent advocates, and the distortion of the terms of the debate. Climate change has become another flashpoint for irrational, hateful, sometimes violent rhetoric, and even personal attacks on people who have risen to some prominence as scientists, funders, and advocates.

Stephan Lewandowsky, a University of Bristol cognitive scientist who studies science denial, notes how the virulently anti-government message that has long dominated climate denial discourse shares common themes with people who believe in conspiracy theories writ large. “Science as well as respect for others’ religions or ethnicity are considered establishment norms, just like truth-telling, and hence the people who support (and are incited by) Donald Trump are likely to reject all of those norms,” Lewandowsky tells Mother Jones, “which again would link science denial, anti-Semitism, and conspiracy theories as a cluster or related phenomena.”

The appropriation of particular labels, often involving Nazis, has also appeared in environmental debates. Self-described climate change skeptics have rejected being called “deniers,” arguing, as the conservative think tank figure and Trump EPA transition official Myron Ebell has, that the label is meant to tie “some people to Holocaust denial.” But the skeptic side has deployed an even more direct appropriation of Holocaust imagery.

In 2014, University of Alabama-Huntsville meteorologist Roy Spencer suggested on his blog that the best defense against the label “denier” would be to call those who were concerned with rising temperatures “global warming Nazis.” He even used an image of a swatsika on the post to illustrate his point, sparking a flurry of news coverage. His suggestion drew condemnation from the Anti Defamation League Southeast chapter.

In another incident, while talking to a gathering of oil and gas representatives in March, Representative Clay Higgins, a Louisiana Republican, casually and repeatedly referenced the “Three Percenters,” a movement linked to violent white supremacy that sprung up after Obama’s election, taking its name from the myth that 3 percent of colonists were behind the American Revolution. “You, ladies and gentlemen, are the Three Percenters of the modern era,” he said in remarks first reported by DeSmog Blog, “where wars are fought with monies and strategies and energy.”

Climate change denial extends across a spectrum, ranging from arguments against solutions, to assertions that scientific findings have been exaggerated, but they all tend to return to a central point: Blaming a small number of alarmists for perpetuating large-scale fraud that has convinced thousands of scientists and countries to devote billions of dollars to combating a myth that the planet is warming. The climate-denial world has an even more tightly knit web of industry-connected groups, shown for decades to undermine the science out of self- preservation and profit. Organizations like the Heritage Foundation and the more far-flung Heartland Institute work to provide a patina of intellectual legitimacy for the same talking points that wind up on Fox News — and on social media.

Though the science itself is nonpartisan, the belief or disbelief in climate change is not, embodying many of the establishment norms that large swaths of the GOP have come to reject, from accepting science to embracing global cooperation as a solution to complex problems. In the same way that the right has transformed Steyer and Soros into all-powerful villains of the left, some climate scientists have long been targets of similar abuse.

Always free, always fresh.

 
Ask your climate scientist if Grist is right for you. See our privacy policy

The small world of climate skeptics, who often tend to be older, white, and male, has responded to the mailed bombs with a similar kind of denial they show on the science. Steve Milloy, a member of Trump’s EPA transition team who rejects climate science on his JunkScience blog, suggested the bomb threats were a false flag. “Having a fake bomb addressed to you is the new Democrat status symbol,” he tweeted. E&E News caught a number of prominent climate skeptics advancing a similar line.

“When it comes to climate denial, the No. 1 scientist who is accused of pretty much everything that you can possibly be accused of is Mike Mann, who is accused of single-handedly getting the world’s governments to commit billions of dollars to this hoax,” Lewandowsky says. “[It] is entirely consistent with what conspiracy theorists always do, which is to say they identify a few people who are targets. And then they say they are so powerful that everything in the world is driven through these few.”

Penn State climate scientist Michael Mann is familiar with the phenomenon, having been the subject of decades of attacks that reached a critical point when climate scientists’ emails were hacked and dumped on the web in 2009, feeding a media frenzy that gave undue weight to conspiracy theories. Around that time he was named alongside other experts on a neo-Nazi website, Stormfront.

“The same hatred and conspiratorial ideation that is that the center of Trumpism also underlies the poisonous atmosphere that pervades the public discourse when it come to the issue of climate change,” Mann wrote in an email. He has described the harassment he faced in more detail in his book, The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars, explaining an envelope of white powder he received and the flood of hate mail and death threats charging him with orchestrating a global hoax.

NASA climatologist Gavin Schmidt has also long been on the receiving end of both anti-Semitic and climate change denier hate mail and emails, sharing some of his experiences on his Twitter feed. Social media has amplified and provided a platform for toxic harassment, but “I’m not seeing a commensurate rise in climate denial,” he wrote in an email. “If anything it’s the other way: the denialist positions in prominent speakers are moving towards acceptance of the science — not all the way of course — while still pushing back on solutions. And the out-and-out denial is not getting the audience it did.”

Katharine Hayhoe, a Texas Tech climate scientist and self-identified evangelical Christian, often invokes her faith in explaining the need to act to slow down the progress of global warming. Often prominent deniers invoke their faith to advance fossil-fuel-friendly talking points — think Scott Pruitt, who invoked God to justify burning fossil fuels. Hayhoe, who also finds herself facing harassment for her work, draws on her religion to make a moral case to act on the scientific evidence, not bury one’s head in the ground. A scientist alarmed by the impacts of climate change, she has also observed that the anger surrounding the climate debate may have its roots in similar impulses present in other toxic debates. “I think that right now we’re facing a time of tremendous change in race, gender, socioeconomic status, and privilege. It’s especially frightening if you feel you’re going to lose from the change.”

That fear of change and uncertainty, Hayhoe thinks, is connected to the anger. Replacing coal, oil, and gas, which we’ve used for hundreds of years, with solar panels and wind turbines, is still another example of the unpredictability inherent in change.

“I think we often tend to treat these issues as all separate issues,” she says. “Rejection of climate change and harassment of scientists is a package. It’s not an issue that stands by itself. It goes along with symbols of change, racial issues and gender issues and political.”

See the article here: 

Tom Steyer and the link between hate groups and climate denial

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Tom Steyer and the link between hate groups and climate denial

This map shows the 5 hottest midterm races for climate

Earlier this fall, the world’s top climate scientists gave humanity about 10 years to avoid a future that really sucks. With the midterm elections right around the corner, that warning means voters are effectively deciding which candidates to trust with the keys to the climate. If voters are sufficiently worried about warming, that anxiety might help determine who is put in office.

According to Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, worry is a stronger predictor of policy support than other emotions. “We found that it’s not fear, it’s not anger, and it’s not disgust or guilt,” he explained. “Worry doesn’t hijack, doesn’t overwhelm, rationality. It can really spur it.”

So just how worried about the planet’s future are voters in the nation’s tightest congressional races? Grist created a map overlaying competitive elections, as identified by The Cook Political Report, with climate concern data from Yale’s 2018 Climate Opinion Maps.

Always free, always fresh.

 
Ask your climate scientist if Grist is right for you. See our privacy policy

These toss-up elections are spread throughout the country. Some are sprawling rural districts, others are comprised primarily of dense cities or metro areas. (Keep in mind that congressional districts vary in size, but each holds roughly the same number of people.) Each district varies in what percentage of its constituents report being worried about climate change — represented from yellow (not that worried) to red (pretty worried).

Interestingly, even in those districts where folks seem less concerned about climate change, a majority of people worry about it. Most of the seats in play are currently held by Republicans. And while several Democrats have doubled down on environmental policies, like renewable energy, climate change is a bipartisan issue in many of these communities.

Look closely at the map, and you’ll see a handful of neck-and-neck races in places chock full of climate-worriers. These communities range from the beaches of Miami and Southern California to the suburbs of Houston. Grist examined five of these highly climate-concerned toss-up districts to see what local factors may shift the balance of power in Congress.

Editor’s note: This map is based on up-to-date data at the time of publishing. Also, Grist’s analysis excludes districts from Pennsylvania, because it recently redrew its congressional maps — and Yale’s data was collected before the redistricting effort. Sorry, Keystone State!


California 48th district (67 percent of residents are worried)

Members of various political and environmental groups pose for a group picture after press conference against offshore drilling along the California coast in Huntington Beach, CA, on Wednesday, July 25, 2018.Jeff Gritchen / Digital First Media / Orange County Register / Getty Images

California’s 48th congressional district includes much of coastal Orange County, and the local midterms are about as melodramatic as an episode of The O.C.

Story continues below

Republican Dana Rohrabacher has represented this affluent, conservative bastion in a deep-blue state since 1989, but his seat is in play due in part to a few recent scandals: He had more than one clandestine meeting with Marina Butina, the former NRA darling arrested on suspicion of Russian espionage and election interference. That’s landed him on the radar of the Mueller investigation — and in hot water with voters. “They call me Putin’s best friend,” he told ABC last year. “I’m not Putin’s best friend.”

But even Republicans who deny Russian entanglements can’t get away with denying climate change in this sea-level community. The district’s stunning coastlines — from Huntington Beach to Laguna Beach — could see chronic flooding by 2030. That science isn’t lost on homeowners in the area, says Ray Hiemstra, co-chair of the Sierra Club’s Angeles Chapter Political Committee. “They’re actually starting to think, ‘Maybe I should start thinking of selling my place.’”

Rohrabacher says he supports solar and nuclear energy, as well as expanding oil and gas production. The staunch Trump supporter has stated in the past that offshore drilling is safer than importing oil on tankers, pointing to incidents such as the 1984 American Trader spill. In contrast, his opponent, Democratic candidate Harley Rouda, says he’ll promote clean energy while pushing back on offshore drilling efforts.

Florida 26th district (67 percent are worried)

REUTERS/Bryan Woolston

The tides are already lapping at the door in the low-lying Florida Keys. Within the century, scientists predict that much of South Florida could be underwater.

It’s no wonder that residents in Florida’s 26th congressional district — the state’s southernmost region which includes all three of its national parks, as well as part of Miami-Dade County — are some of the Americans who are most concerned about climate change in the nation. Almost 70 percent of its constituents are Latino, most of them Cuban-American. Polls show that Latinos consistently want climate action more than the population at large.

So what are people most concerned about? In addition to king tides, Elizabeth Bonnell, chair of the Sierra Club’s Miami Group, points to “climate gentrification” — when developers buy up future beachfront properties in low-income neighborhoods, pushing out current residents. Then, there’s the stifling heat, toxic algae, and dangerous hurricanes that have been brewing in the Atlantic recently.

The seat is one of the top 10 House races to watch in 2018, according to Politico. But District 26 is a special place where both candidates running for the House seat — yes, including the Republican — have explicitly backed climate action.

Incumbent Carlos Curbelo is one of only a handful of Republicans to openly address climate change. In February 2016 he co-founded the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus, which earned him a spot on the 2017 Grist 50 list. But this year, in the wake of Hurricane Michael, Curbelo called people who linked the historic storm, which intensified rapidly thanks to the Gulf of Mexico’s warmer-than-normal waters, climate change “alarmists.” The stance earned him some criticism.

“Those of us who truly care about #climatechange must be sober when discussing its connection to #HurricaneMichael or any other storm,” Curbelo tweeted. “Florida has had hurricanes for centuries. There’s no time to waste, but alarmists hurt the cause & move our fight for #climatesolutions backward.”

One week out from the election, the race is narrowing. And Democratic challenger Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, a former associate dean at Florida International University, has made the environment a key component of her political ads.

Texas 7th district (65 percent are worried)

Residents of the Houston neighborhood of Meyerland wait on an I-610 overpass for help during the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey on August 27, 2017.Brendan Smialowski / AFP / Getty Images

The Texas 7th is affluent, well-educated, largely residential — and as a result of Hurricane Harvey, still recovering from being underwater for a chunk of 2017.

While the east side of Houston has long been infamous for its oil and gas infrastructure, the more affluent west side is becoming increasingly vulnerable to climate change in the form of freak storms. It has suffered extensive flooding from Harvey and at least two other storms in the past five years.

Republican John Culberson has represented Texas 7th since 2001. As he faces a tough reelection this year against Democratic challenger Lizzie Pannill Fletcher, he’s largely avoided talking about climate change, including declining an invitation in January to a community climate forum held in his district. While he has eschewed those exact words during his re-election bid, Rep. Culberson has used last year’s hurricane as a major talking point, name-dropping the storm in more than half of his emails to voters this year.

“He hasn’t been one of the snowball throwers calling climate change a hoax,” said Daniel Cohan, an environmental engineering professor at Rice University. “But he takes a wait-and-see attitude, falsely indicating that the science isn’t clear.”

For a district that’s borne the brunt of so many environmental disasters, it’s unclear how much sway climate change will have over the results of this race. According to Mark Jones, a political scientist at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy, there may not be enough swing voters in the Texas 7th who care about the issue. Those that do care already know how they’re voting. But Jones adds, there are “not an insignificant number” of voters who are still grappling with Harvey and could be potentially influenced by talk of climate policy.

Read more coverage on how climate politics are playing out in west Houston.

Texas 32nd district (65 percent are worried)

Shutterstock

Texas has a lot of skin the game when it comes to climate change. A National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientist once dubbed the state “the disaster capital of the United States” for its unique meteorological conditions.

Texas’ 32nd congressional district, which includes the suburbs northeast of Dallas, saw unprecedented rains and flooding in September and October. The storms led to multiple deaths in the Dallas area. An extreme drought and heat wave this past summer resulted in a remarkable uptick in heat-related hospital visits.

Like Texas overall, the 32nd is a “majority-minority” district: 49 percent white, 25 percent Latino, 15 percent black, and eight percent Asian. Environmental polls have shown that people of color are more likely to care about climate change compared to white people. And the district’s demographics are now colliding with extreme weather to drive climate concern.

At least for now, climate politics in the 32nd — which is more affluent than much of the state — are traditionally partisan. Pete Sessions, the incumbent Republican who’s represented the district (and its previous incarnation, District 5) since 1997, has a lifetime score of two percent from the League of Conservation Voters, indicating a strong anti-environment record. Sessions’ campaign platform includes “reining in the EPA” and opening public lands for drilling. When Sessions was questioned early last year about his support for controversial EPA head Scott Pruitt, he hanged the subject, putting the blame on New York and the Northeast for polluting America.

Sessions’ main opponent, Democrat Colin Allred, is an ex-football player and current civil rights attorney whose main focus is on reducing voter disenfranchisement. His environmental platform states he believes in promoting investment in renewable energy, “rejoining” the Paris climate accord, and defending the independence of the EPA and NOAA.

New Jersey 7th district (64 percent are worried)

The lower level of Lambertville Inn is covered in water as the Delaware River crests August 29, 2011, in Lambertville, New Jersey.William Thomas Cain / Getty Images

New Jersey’s 7th congressional district stretches from New York City’s western suburbs all the way to the banks of the Delaware River. Not only does the river serve as the water supply for more than 15 million Americans, but it’s also a source of considerable climate worry for constituents.

Polluted runoff finds its way into waterways which add to the district’s rising rivers, damaging families, homes, and businesses. Climate change-related flooding threatens the quality of life across the district according to Ed Potosnak, executive director of the New Jersey League of Conservation Voters. “That’s where lack of action by Congress has left families vulnerable,” he told Grist.

New Jersey is the most densely populated state in the U.S., and the district runs the socioeconomic gamut, with a mix of suburban, exurban, and rural communities.

Republican Congressman Leonard Lance has represented the district since 2009. He’s also a member of the Climate Solutions Caucus. Though Lance has been a rare voice espousing the reality of climate change within the GOP, he also has a track record of siding with big business and the fossil fuel industry on legislation. Lance has a lifetime score of 23 percent on the League of Conservation Voters’ scorecard, hardly the marks of an environmentalist.

Lance’s opponent, Democrat Tom Malinowski, is new to New Jersey, but not to politics. He served as Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor under President Obama. According to the League of Conservation Voters, he has dedicated his career to people’s rights to breathe clean air and drink clean water. Like his opponent, Malinowski has stated he believes that humans are exacerbating climate change. He has promised to oppose pipelines that will run across the state and has spoken out against offshore drilling,


Additional Reporting Credit

Map development: Lo Bénichou  from Mapbox

Map data: The Cook Political Report and Yale’s 2018 Climate Opinion Maps (as of 10/30/2018)

Community profiles: Justine Calma, Kate Yoder, Stephen Paulsen, Eve Andrews, Paola Rosa-Aquino

Originally posted here:  

This map shows the 5 hottest midterm races for climate

Posted in alo, Anchor, Anker, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Safer, solar, The Atlantic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This map shows the 5 hottest midterm races for climate

Energy and Civilization – Vaclav Smil

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

Energy and Civilization
A History
Vaclav Smil

Genre: Science & Nature

Price: $19.99

Publish Date: May 12, 2017

Publisher: The MIT Press

Seller: The MIT Press


A comprehensive account of how energy has shaped society throughout history, from pre-agricultural foraging societies through today’s fossil fuel–driven civilization. “I wait for new Smil books the way some people wait for the next ‘Star Wars’ movie. In his latest book, Energy and Civilization: A History , he goes deep and broad to explain how innovations in humans’ ability to turn energy into heat, light, and motion have been a driving force behind our cultural and economic progress over the past 10,000 years. —Bill Gates, Gates Notes , Best Books of the Year Energy is the only universal currency; it is necessary for getting anything done. The conversion of energy on Earth ranges from terra-forming forces of plate tectonics to cumulative erosive effects of raindrops. Life on Earth depends on the photosynthetic conversion of solar energy into plant biomass. Humans have come to rely on many more energy flows—ranging from fossil fuels to photovoltaic generation of electricity—for their civilized existence. In this monumental history, Vaclav Smil provides a comprehensive account of how energy has shaped society, from pre-agricultural foraging societies through today’s fossil fuel–driven civilization. Humans are the only species that can systematically harness energies outside their bodies, using the power of their intellect and an enormous variety of artifacts—from the simplest tools to internal combustion engines and nuclear reactors. The epochal transition to fossil fuels affected everything: agriculture, industry, transportation, weapons, communication, economics, urbanization, quality of life, politics, and the environment. Smil describes humanity’s energy eras in panoramic and interdisciplinary fashion, offering readers a magisterial overview. This book is an extensively updated and expanded version of Smil’s Energy in World History (1994). Smil has incorporated an enormous amount of new material, reflecting the dramatic developments in energy studies over the last two decades and his own research over that time.

View this article – 

Energy and Civilization – Vaclav Smil

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Energy and Civilization – Vaclav Smil

Utility Solar Installations to Grow Despite Tariff

Leave this field empty if you’re human:

“cookieName”:”wBounce”,”isAggressive”:false,”isSitewide”:true,”hesitation”:””,”openAnimation”:false,”exitAnimation”:false,”timer”:””,”sensitivity”:””,”cookieExpire”:”30″,”cookieDomain”:””,”autoFire”:””,”isAnalyticsEnabled”:true

earth911

Link – 

Utility Solar Installations to Grow Despite Tariff

Posted in FF, GE, ONA, PUR, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Utility Solar Installations to Grow Despite Tariff

For climate activist Henry Red Cloud, old ways, new urgency

On a crisp and rainy May morning on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota, Henry Red Cloud recounted his team’s strategy for planting more than 1,000 ponderosa pine saplings in six short hours. Over coffee, he detailed the day’s agenda, location, and logistics with six staff members and three volunteers — a small crew compared to most planting days.

“There’s no getting to the burn-site,” he said. “There has been too much rain, so we will go over to one of the residential sites.”

Six years ago, Henry watched a wildfire rip across 25,000 acres of Pine Ridge Indian Reservation land only 20 miles from his home. Since that time, he says he’s noticed an increase in erosion and landslide events thanks to more sustained moisture over the spring and summer months.

Six years ago, a wildfire ripped across 25,000 acres of Pine Ridge Indian Reservation land. Now, indigenous activist Henry Red Cloud is working with a team to reforest the burn site.Grist / Alex Basaraba

“Due to climate change, we now have the potential to see rain all summer long,” he said.

A member of the Oglala Lakota Sioux and a fifth-generation direct descendant of the Lakota warrior Chief Red Cloud, Henry Red Cloud is focused on resiliency — both through reforestation of the land and teaching tribal communities about sustainable energy. In partnership with the organization Trees, Water, and People, a non-profit based out of Fort Collins, Colorado, Red Cloud and his team have planted more than 100,000 ponderosa pines on Pine Ridge over the past six years. Once they reach maturity, the trees will help prevent landslides, support biodiversity, and provide windbreak and shade for community members.

Hannah Eining, an employee of the Colorado State Forest Service (CSFS) meticulously cares for ponderosa pine seedlings at the CSFS tree nursery. Located in northwestern Fort Collins, Colorado, the nursery team harvests native tree seeds from the Black Hills, raises them into saplings, and transports them back to Pine Ridge for planting.Grist / Alex Basaraba

Indigenous-led efforts like Red Cloud’s may play an important role in developing an effective global response to the threat of climate change. According to a new Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, released Monday, which outlines the impacts of global warming and offers strategies to stave off the worst of them: “Many scholars argue that recognition of indigenous rights, governance systems, and laws is central to adaptation, mitigation, and sustainable development.”

Located in northwestern Fort Collins, the Colorado State Forest Service tree nursery supports the growth of 50 different native tree species.Grist / Alex Basaraba

While tribal innovators like Red Cloud may be on the front lines of combatting climate change, tribal communities are among those most at risk. Today, Native reservations face unique and disproportionate impacts associated with warming, such as the loss of culturally significant food, medicines, and knowledge, as well as reduced access and rights to water.

“Reservations were put on land nobody else wanted because it was too hot, cold, or windy,” Red Cloud says.

On Pine Ridge, the increasingly harsh conditions exacerbate high poverty rates and inadequate housing. In general, the average tribal household spends a higher percentage of its financial resources on electricity and heat than any other in the country. Winters can be long and cold here, and about 30 percent of people live without electricity.

Eriq Acosta, the national program director of Trees, Water, and People helps transport another load of ponderosa pine tree saplings to be planted on the sacred Wounded Knee Massacre site located on Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.Grist / Alex Basaraba

By learning how to build and install small-scale solar furnaces, lighting systems, and water pumps, Red Cloud hopes individuals are able to bring these tools back to their own communities. Only five hours north at Standing Rock Reservation, Red Cloud and his team provided workshops on small-scale solar and off-grid renewable systems to hundreds of activists at the Dakota Access Pipeline Water Protector camps during the brutal 2016-17 winter.

According to a recent report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, tribal lands across the U.S. (including Pine Ridge) have vast potential for renewable energy and much of those resources have not yet been harnessed. Investing in renewable technologies, Red Cloud says, provides jobs, energy savings, and economic opportunity.”

Henry Red Cloud’s work involves more than planting trees. Through the Red Cloud Renewable Energy Center, he provides workshops on small-scale solar and off-grid projects to more than 40 tribes across the U.S.Grist / Alex Basaraba

At his training facility, the Red Cloud Renewable Energy Center, Red Cloud’s workshops range from do-it-yourself solar air furnace builds and straw bale home construction to wind turbine use and reforestation techniques. Inside a large Quonset hut warmed by a wood-burning barrel fireplace, the center provides staff, volunteers, and guests with cozy dormitory-style accommodations, hot showers, and a family-style dining area. The walls and ceiling are brightly decorated with art and photos. The white dry-erase board showcases diagrams and scribbles highlighting effective reforestation techniques leftover from the prior week’s training.

Recently, Red Cloud was nominated for the prestigious Oceti Sakowin Fellowship with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. And at 59, there are no signs of him slowing down. Whether it’s in preparing a new team of volunteers to plant saplings or leading a workshop on residential-scale solar furnaces, Red Cloud says he plans to continue to work towards building a more resilient and sustainable future for his people and for indigenous communities across the United States.

“That is my role,” he says, “to share my knowledge and to help bring awareness.”

Volunteers plant the new saplings on Pine Ridge Indian Reservation Tribal lands. Over two months, nearly 75 volunteers assisted Henry and his team in planting around 33,000 saplings.Grist / Alex Basaraba

As the rain began to let up outside the center, Red Cloud climbed into his truck for the short drive to the greenhouse. The thousands of vibrant, green saplings covered every available space on the floor and counter, their pungent aroma slowly covering the staleness of the damp, moldy greenhouse air with the sharpness of fresh pine.

To Red Cloud, this work is about supporting economic opportunity and resiliency to climate change. He hopes that it empowers people to carry forward a vision shared by his ancestors to build a better life for the next generations — “a new way to honor the old ways,” he says.

See original article: 

For climate activist Henry Red Cloud, old ways, new urgency

Posted in alo, Anchor, Aroma, FF, GE, global climate change, LAI, ONA, Pines, ProPublica, Radius, solar, sustainable energy, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on For climate activist Henry Red Cloud, old ways, new urgency