EC

ec@lists.wvsierraclub.org

2254 discussions

Link to Utica Shale story amd my EE response.
by James Kotcon 15 Jul '15

15 Jul '15

Just FYI. What I should have said is that we need to keep most of the fossil fuels we have already found in the ground, so finding more is a really poor investment of resources. JBK http://www.wdtv.com/wdtv.cfm?func=view§ion=5-News&item=WVU-Releases-Study-o…<http://www.wdtv.com/wdtv.cfm?func=view&section=5-News&item=WVU-Releases-Stu…> [http://www.wdtv.com/content/images/Jobs-Economy/gas(1).jpg]<http://www.wdtv.com/wdtv.cfm?func=view&section=5-News&item=WVU-Releases-Stu…> WDTV.COM 5 News: WVU Releases Study on Utica Shale; Environmentalists Respond A two year study led by WVU researched the Appalachian basin for Utica shale exploration and presented what they're calling a "Utica Play Book" in... Read more...<http://www.wdtv.com/wdtv.cfm?func=view&section=5-News&item=WVU-Releases-Stu…>

2 1

Fwd: Very interesting. The Mighty Southern to offer solar - going head to head w/third party installers.
by James Kotcon 15 Jul '15

15 Jul '15

Here is an interesting idea from the Georgia Chapter. Can we get AEP or First Energy to offer their own home solar program? There was an interesting editorial earlier this year which suggested that "if a utility has to fight battles against solar, they have already lost the war". The smart utilities win by figuring out how to serve their customers by providing what the customer wants. JBK ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Colleen Kiernan <colleen.kiernan(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 1:52 PM Subject: Re: Very interesting. The Mighty Southern to offer solar - going head to head w/third party installers. To: CONS-FRED(a)lists.sierraclub.org --------------------------- cc:Mail Users----------------------------- ** Remember to DELETE the 'Sender: ...' lines above before REPLYing ** ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, I'm not sure if referring customers to solar contractors and home improvement loan banks really qualifies as a "solar program." I guess it's more of a "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" posture. I still hope Sungevity gets here soon and we can kill it on the Sierra Club Solar Homes program! If so, first round is on the Georgia Chapter at the Colloq :D Colleen Kiernan Sierra Club Georgia Chapter Director 404-607-1262 x224 sierraclub.org/georgia Click HERE <http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=xwH75dZUf1g&offerid=343370.100…> to join Sierra Club today! On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Glen Besa <glen.besa(a)sierraclub.org> wrote: > --------------------------- cc:Mail Users----------------------------- > ** Remember to DELETE the 'Sender: ...' lines above before REPLYing ** > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Wow. Adapt or die! Any insights Colleen? > > Sent from my iPhone > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From:* Bruce Nilles <bruce.nilles(a)sierraclub.org> > *Date:* July 1, 2015 at 12:06:34 PM EDT > *To:* "#Coal" <coal-list(a)sierraclub.org> > *Subject:* *Very interesting. The Mighty Southern to offer solar - going > head to head w/third party installers.* > > > SOLAR:Georgia Power rolls out state's first rooftop program -- 'we're > putting our brand behind it' > > Kristi E. Swartz <http://www.eenews.net/staff/Kristi_E_Swartz>, E&E > reporter > Published: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 > > Southern Co.'s Georgia Power rolled out details of its rooftop solar > installation program as the Peach State's new law allowing for solar > competition takes effect today. > > The law makes rooftop solar systems more accessible for residents and > businesses by permitting long-term financing arrangements to alleviate > pricey upfront panel costs. > > For Georgia, the law means letting competition into a state dominated by a > regulated utility. As expected, Georgia Power is getting into the business > in its own way, through an unregulated subsidiary. > > Initially, this means the utility will sell and install rooftop solar > panels, said Norrie McKenzie, Georgia Power's vice president of renewable > development. It will not finance or lease them right now, he said. > > That may change as time goes on, he said. At this point, Georgia Power's > unregulated Energy Services group will work with subcontractors to sell and > install the panels. > > The utility also will refer customers to a "financing partner" to get a > so-called personal home improvement loan, McKenzie said. > > The company continues to finalize the subcontractor list and did not > release names currently on it. Any rooftop solar contract would be between > the homeowner and Georgia Power, however, not with the subcontractor, > utility executives clarified. > > "We're putting our brand behind it," said Ervan Hancock, Georgia Power's > manager of renewable development implementation. > > Georgia Power also is updating and expanding the portion of its website > about rooftop solar. The site walks customers through a series of questions > about their home, roof and monthly electric bill to determine whether to > move forward with installing solar panels. > > Additional steps include talking with a "solar energy expert" at Georgia > Power who will review a customer's bill to determine how much money will be > saved with a rooftop solar installation. Customers may be referred to one > of the roughly two-dozen certified solar contracts on the company's > website, or work with the Energy Services group, McKenzie said. > > "By the time you get to the point where you want to buy a system, we will > walk the customer through to make sure it is really a value or not," he > said. > An opening for solar providers > > Georgia's law throws open the door for national solar providers to enter > the state, though some such as SolarCity and Sunrun are calling for > additional policy changes. A few national solar players have entered the > Southeast whether or not third-party solar financing has been available. > > NRG Energy has pushed into the residential solar market in North Carolina, > a state that prohibits such long-term financial arrangements (*EnergyWire* > <http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2015/02/25/stories/1060013976>, Feb. > 25). Sunrun recently announced a move into South Carolina, which last year > enacted a wide-ranging renewable energy law that includes third-party > leasing. > > Any of those companies now are welcome in Georgia and can enter into > leasing arrangements with homeowners or businesses where the monthly > payment is based on the solar system's production. Those companies still > cannot directly sell power, McKenzie said. > > "The lease payments are based on output," he said. "Only a utility can > sell power." > > The solar financing law marks a continued transformation of Georgia and > the Southeast from a place that was resistant to renewables to one that has > a patchwork of pro-solar policies for residents, as well as utility-scale > operations that have added solar to the grid. > > A surge in solar installations in Georgia over the first three months of > 2015 also spurred nearly 3,000 new jobs and burnished the state's status as > an emerging hot spot for clean energy in the Southeast (*ClimateWire* > <http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/stories/1060021074/>, June 30). > > Georgia Power also is close to having 1 gigawatt of solar on its grid by > the end of next year. The state had roughly 11 megawatts five years ago. > > "This rooftop solar business is just the next evolution of us," Hancock > told *EnergyWire*. > Twitter: @BizWriterKristi <https://twitter.com/BizWriterKristi> | Email: > kswartz(a)eenews.net > <https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&fs=1&tf=1&to=kswartz@eenews.net> > > -- > Bruce Nilles > Sierra Club > 415-977-5640 (o) > 608-712-9725 (c) > www.beyondcoal.org > twitter: @brucenilles > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To > unsubscribe from the CONS-FRED list, send any message to: > CONS-FRED-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv > Lists support site for more information: > http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club > Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the > Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions at > http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the CONS-FRED list, send any message to: CONS-FRED-signoff-request(a)LISTS.SIERRACLUB.ORG Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp Sign up to receive Sierra Club Insider, the flagship e-newsletter. Sent out twice a month, it features the Club's latest news and activities. Subscribe and view recent editions at http://www.sierraclub.org/insider/

1 0

Solar Open House
by frank young 02 Jul '15

02 Jul '15

SOLAR OPEN HOUSE Sunday, July 12th 1-4pm @ the home of Dan Harrington & Autumn Long 2127 Big Elk Rd, Wallace WV 26448 You are invited to a solar open house here at our farm! Come check out our new net-metered solar PV array and find out more about going solar! Light refreshments will be provided. Questions? Call or email Autumn: 304-796-4677 autumnlong11(a)gmail.com Feel free to share this invitation on social media and with anyone who wants to learn more about residential solar power.

1 0

Fwd: [Coal Volunteers List] Just released: New report on water toxics, coal plants, and health
by Paul Wilson 18 Jun '15

18 Jun '15

Check out this new report and fwd to others. fyi, paul w. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mary Anne Hitt <maryanne.hitt(a)sierraclub.org> Date: Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 12:25 PM Subject: [Coal Volunteers List] Just released: New report on water toxics, coal plants, and health To: #Coal <coal-list(a)sierraclub.org>, #Coal-Volunteers < coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org> Hello Beyond Coal team, Today, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Sierra Club, Environmental Integrity Project, Clean Water Action and Earthjustice are releasing a report entitled "Selling Our Health Down River." We're releasing the report in advance of EPA's September deadline to issue a final rule for coal water toxics, including mercury, arsenic, and lead. The report highlights the public health benefits of a strong final standard. It makes the case that EPA must finalize strong toxic water pollution safeguards to protect the rivers, lakes, and streams where Americans fish, swim, and get their drinking water. Our press release is here <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fcontent.sierraclub.org%2Fpress-r…>, and the report is attached. I'll have a blog up about the report shortly that Heather Moyer will circulate, which you can share on social media and with your networks. Casey Roberts from our Environmental Law Program was one of the authors of the report, and our federal policy and communications teams did a lot of work on the report as well. Thanks to everyone who helped get this over the finish line! I hope all of you will find it to be a valuable resource for your work. Our communications team in DC is working hard today to get this out through all their channels. If you have additional questions or ideas about how to use the report locally, please reach out to your campaign representative or your regional press secretary. My best, Mary Anne -- Mary Anne Hitt Director, Beyond Coal Campaign Sierra Club Blog <http://sierraclub.typepad.com/compass/coal-director/> | Twitter <http://twitter.com/#!/maryannehitt> (@maryannehitt) 304-876-7064 (w) | 540-239-0073 (c) www.beyondcoal.org -- To access the Beyond Coal Campaign Resource Portal, go to: https://sites.google.com/a/sierraclub.org/beyond-coal-resource-portal/ To sign up for this list, email neha.mathew(a)sierraclub.org with the subject and message "SUBSCRIBE #coal-volunteer" --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "#Coal-Volunteers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to coal-volunteers-list+unsubscribe(a)sierraclub.org. To post to this group, send email to coal-volunteers-list(a)sierraclub.org. -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club Military Outdoors Project Healing Waters Fly-fishing 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle JUSTICE, ONLY JUSTICE, SHALT THOU PURSUE. Deuteronomy 16:20

1 0

"misguided strategies of environmental funders"
by frank young 17 Jun '15

17 Jun '15

Why the Environmental Movement Is Not Winning A new report places the blame on misguided strategies of environmental funders. By Peter Montague <http://www.alternet.org/authors/peter-montague> February 24, 2012 A searing new report says the environmental movement is not winning and lays the blame squarely on the failed policies of environmental funders. The movement hasn't won any "significant policy changes at the federal level in the United States since the 1980s" because funders have favored top-down elite strategies and have neglected to support a robust grassroots infrastructure. Environmental funders spent a whopping $10 billion between 2000 and 2009 but achieved relatively little because they failed to underwrite grassroots groups that are essential for any large-scale change,the report <http://www.ncrp.org/files/publications/Cultivating_the_grassroots_final_low…> [3] says. Released in late February by the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy <http://www.ncrp.org/> [4], Cultivating the Grassroots was written by Sarah Hansen, who served as executive director of the Environmental Grantmakers Association <http://ega.org/> [5] from 1998 to 2005. Environmental funders mainly support large, professionalized environmental organizations instead of the scrappy community-based groups that are most heavily impacted by environmental harms. Organizations with annual budgets greater than $5 million make up only 2 percent of all environmental groups, yet receive more than half of all environmental grants and donations. The report makes the simple but profound argument that the current environmental funding strategy is not working and that, without targeting philanthropy at communities most impacted by environmental harms, the movement will continue to fail. "Our funding strategy is misaligned with the great perils our planet and environment face," Hansen writes. "Environmental activists and funders all share a gnawing sense that something has to change. No sensible environmental activist would argue that we, as a field, have done what is needed to respond to environmental degradation," Hansen said in an interview. Instead of funding community-based groups to generate ideas, strategies and political support for transformative change, environmental donors have thrown their weight behind narrow lobbying campaigns in Washington, D.C. -- for example, the failed inside-the-beltway campaign in 2009-2010 to pass "cap and trade" legislation to curb global warming. For their part, mainstream environmental groups hang pleas for environmental change on the apolitical hook of rational appeals, expecting that decision-makers confronted with powerful evidence will do the right thing. But this strategy has not worked because "a vocal, organized, sustained grassroots base is vital to achieving sustained change," the report asserts. How Does Change Happen? "In movements throughout history, the core of leadership came from a nucleus of directly impacted or oppressed communities while also engaging a much broader range of justice-seeking supporters." In other words, successful movements for social change -- anti-slavery, women's suffrage, labor rights, and civil rights -- have always been inspired, energized, and led by those most directly affected. Yet these are the very groups within the environmental movement that are starved for funds. Analysis of environmental grantmaking, 2007-2009, reveals that only 15 percent of environmental grant dollars are classified as benefiting marginalized communities, and only 11 percent are classified as advancing "social justice" strategies, such as community organizing. The report makes a distinction between internet activism or getting your neighbor to sign a petition, and real community organizing. "Community organizing builds power by helping people understand the source of their social or political problems, connect with others facing the same challenges and, together, take action to win concrete change." Community organizing is messy and takes time. The report also distinguishes between "national organizations that might parachute into local communities for one-time policy campaigns versus authentic, local organizations that not only work on those same short- term campaigns but, just as importantly, build long-term leadership and capacity in the community to amplify change in the future." The report points out that the U.S. is growing racially and ethnically more diverse each year and by 2042 will be majority people of color. "New immigrants may come from countries with robust histories of social change movements that, combined with the increasing racial diversity of America's communities, provide an opportunity to diversify the ethnic composition of the environmental movement," the report says. And: "Unlike many of the professional advocates in Washington, D.C., people of color, immigrants, poor people and young people often are living face to face with the devastating impacts of environmental degradation. These growing communities have the self-interest to do something and, increasingly, the collective power to potentially make real change but may lack the support or resources to organize." "In this context, it is arguable that any push for environmental change which fails to prioritize communities of color is a losing strategy," the report says. And, "Until the broader concerns... of all communities are on the radar of environmentalists, it will be hard for environmentalists to be on the radar of all communities." In a stunning revelation, the report offers evidence that, compared to the average of all philanthropic donors, environmental funders avoid supporting disadvantaged people: "There is a seemingly contradictory correlation: analysis shows the greater a funder's commitment to the environment, the less likely it is to prioritize marginalized communities or advance social justice in its environmental grantmaking." Advice for Environmental Funders The report offers a four-point roadmap for "funding the grassroots to win:" 1. Fund work that benefits communities of the future Environmental funders should earmark somewhere between 20 and 50 percent of their total giving to underserved communities. Nearly half of all children in the United States today are black, Latino or Asian American and by 2042, a majority of Americans will be people of color. This is a powerful new constituency ready to take action on environmental issues, the report says. "Prioritizing funding for lower-income communities of color is not only strategic given that these communities are becoming the majority and support environmental change, but also because change that targets the most impacted populations has a multiplier effect for society as a whole," Hansen writes. 2. Invest 25 percent of grant dollars in grassroots action Speaking directly to environmental funders, the report says, "We recommend that you allocate at least 25 percent of your grant dollars for social justice purposes, specifically with a focus on grassroots advocacy, organizing and civic engagement led by the communities most affected by environmental ills and climate change." "The way to build a broad movement around environment and climate solutions is to mobilize diverse communities of people around issues that are much closer to their self-interest (such as stopping toxic pollution, creating viable new jobs and reducing energy bills) and then work intentionally to connect those individuals and campaigns to a larger understanding of communal and global interests. Grassroots groups need resources to be able to engage effectively at all levels (local, state, national and international)." 3. Build supportive infrastructure As the highly-successful right wing in the U.S. can tell you, social movements grow large and powerful only when they are served by a deep infrastructure of organizations offering technical assistance and know-how. Local groups need to be able to find each other, share strategies, develop leadership, communicate their message, identify allies, and gain a wide range of skills. Such an infrastructure requires sustained funding and without it no movement can succeed. 4. Take the long view, prepare for tipping points "Supporting grassroots organizing may require a paradigm shift in a foundation's grantmaking strategy. Depending on how your philanthropy currently supports grassroots organizations or does not, this can mean shedding expectations of microscopic, quick deliverables and embracing the slow, patient process of movement building. Legal work to overturn Jim Crow laws began in the early 1930s with Thurgood Marshall representing the NAACP lawsuits in Maryland. Imagine if early funders of the Civil Rights Movement had tried to "evaluate the impact" of their grants in the ensuing 20 years - before the popular movement took hold. Movement building takes time. "In his important monograph Just Another Emperor: The Myths and Realities of Philanthrocapitalism, former Ford Foundation director Michael Edwards cautions that one of the downsides of increasingly infusing the nonprofit world with business ideals is that social change organizations are expected to churn out good, quarterly metrics. Extreme advocates of these ideas expect social change organizations to report mounds of data and compete with one another for funding based on "numbers" and "deliverables." But on February 1, 1960, sitting at a "Whites Only" lunch counter at a Woolworth's in Greensboro, N.C., there were only four African American students from a local college. Although those may not appear to be impressive metrics, consider the scale and scope of the movement they helped launch." Peter Montague is a historian and journalist whose work has appeared in Counterpunch, Huffington Post, the Nation and many other publications. He has co-authored two books on toxic heavy metals. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mountain Party Executive Committee" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mountainpartyexcom+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to mountainpartyexcom(a)googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mountainpartyexcom. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

1 1

Interesting study out of Princeton: 20 Years Of Data Reveals That Congress Doesn't Care What You Think
by Paul Wilson 05 Jun '15

05 Jun '15

Makes you think about how far Birth Place of Rivers NM or Energy Efficiency goals will get in our current delegation.... *20 Years Of Data Reveals That Congress Doesn't Care What You Think* - For the last few years, I've had this sense that everything I learned as a kid about how America's government works is completely wrong. But I had no idea how bad things actually were until I saw one simple graph … more <http://listserv.steelworkers.org/t/257586/1028185/151336/17/> Here's the link if you want to go directly to the website: http://www.upworthy.com/20-years-of-data-reveals-that-congress-doesnt-care-… enjoy, paul -- Paul Wilson Sierra Club Military Outdoors Project Healing Waters Fly-fishing 504 Jefferson Ave Charles Town, WV 25414-1130 Phone: 304-725-4360 Cell: 304-279-1361 "There is no forward until you have gone back" ~Buddha "In all things of nature there is something of the marvelous" ~ Aristotle JUSTICE, ONLY JUSTICE, SHALT THOU PURSUE. Deuteronomy 16:20

1 0

Wind and Solar Provide 100% of New Generating Capacity in April
by James Kotcon 26 May '15

26 May '15

?These data from the US Energy Information Agency show that, for the first four months of 2015, renewables provided 84 % of new capacity added to the grid, while gas added the remaining 16 %. Oil coal, and nukes had no added capacity so far this year. Renewables was 100 % f new capacity for the month of April. These data count utility scale generation, and do not include distributed generation such as residential roof-top solar. Full story at: http://ecowatch.com/2015/05/26/wind-solar-april-capacity/ Wind and Solar Provide 100% of New Generating Capacity in April According to the latest report from FERC's Office of Energy Projects, renewable energy accounted for all new generating capacity in April. Wind and solar accounted Read more...<http://ecowatch.com/2015/05/26/wind-solar-april-capacity/> Jim Kotcon

1 0

US House Committee cuts $300 million from NASA budget for climate change research.
by William V. DePaulo, Esq. 26 May '15

26 May '15

May 6, 2015 The G.O.P.’s War on Science Gets Worse By Elizabeth Kolbert <http://www.newyorker.com/contributors/elizabeth-kolbert> During last fall’s midterm election campaign, “I’m not a scientist” became a standard Republican answer to questions about climate change. The line seemed to invite parody, and Stephen Colbert (among others) obliged. He played clips of House Speaker John Boehner, then Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Florida Governor Rick Scott all offering, more or less word for word, the same refrain. “Everyone who denies climate change has the same stirring message,” Colbert observed <http://gawker.com/stephen-colbert-calls-out-im-not-a-scientist-climate-1656…>. “ ‘We don’t know what the fuck we’re talking about.’ ” The line worked—or, at least, didn’t *not *work—and Republicans won both houses of Congress. Now, it seems, they are trying to go one better. They are trying to prevent even scientists from being scientists. Last week, the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, headed by Texas Republican Lamar Smith, approved a bill that would slash at least three hundred million dollars from NASA’s earth-science budget. “Earth science, of course, includes climate science,” Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Texas Democrat who is also on the committee, noted <http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/240549-congress-we-have-a-problem>. (Smith said <http://www.hq.nasa.gov/legislative/hearings/4-16-2015_SMITH_OPENING_STATEME…> that the White House’s NASA budget request favored the earth sciences “at the expense of the other science divisions and human and robotic space exploration.”) Johnson tried to get the cuts eliminated from the bill, but her proposed amendment was rejected. Defunding NASA’s earth-science program takes willed ignorance one giant leap further. It means that not only will climate studies be ignored; some potentially useful data won’t even be collected. The vote brought howls of protest from NASA itself and from wider earth-science circles. The agency’s administrator, Charles Bolden, issued a statement <http://www.wset.com/story/28947047/nasa-administrator-statement-on-house-au…> saying that the bill “guts our Earth science program and threatens to set back generations worth of progress in better understanding our changing climate.” In an opinion piece for the Washington* Post*, Marshall Shepherd, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Georgia and the former president of the American Meteorological Association, said that he could not sleep after hearing about the vote. “None of us has a ‘vacation planet’ we can go to for the weekend, so I argue that NASA’s mission to study planet Earth should be a ‘no-brainer,’ ” he wrote <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/05/01/cutt…> . The vote on the NASA bill came just a week after the same House committee approved major funding cuts to the National Science Foundation’s geosciences program, as well as cuts to Department of Energy programs that support research into new energy sources. As Michael Hiltzik <http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-gop-attack-on-climate-chan…>, a columnist for the Los Angeles *Times,* noted, the committee is “living down to our worst expectations.” The practical implications of the proposed cuts are certainly disturbing. (It’s going to be hard for D.O.E. to find new energy sources if it isn’t even looking for them.) But perhaps even more distressing is the mindset that led to them. The “I’m not a scientist” line is basically a declaration of willed ignorance. You might think people entrusted by voters to craft public policy would be embarrassed to acknowledge, to paraphrase Colbert, that they have no idea what they’re talking about, and don’t want to. “Well, I’m not a scientist, either. But you know what? I know a lot of really good scientists at NASA, and at N.O.A.A., and at our major universities,” President Barack Obama put it a few few months ago, in his State of the Union address <https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/20/remarks-president-st…>, referring to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “And the best scientists in the world are all telling us that our activities are changing the climate.” Cutting NASA and the N.S.F.’s climate-science budgets isn’t going to alter the basic realities of climate change. No one needs an advanced degree to understand this. Indeed, the idea that ignoring a problem isn’t going to make it go away is one that kids should grasp by the time they’re six or seven. But ignoring a problem does often make it more difficult to solve. And that, you have to assume, in a perverse way, is the goal here. What we don’t know, we can’t act on. “It’s hard to believe that in order to serve an ideological agenda, the majority is willing to slash the science that helps us have a better understanding of our home planet,” Representative Johnson wrote. Hard to believe, but, unfortunately, true. ---------------------------------------- Elizabeth Kolbert has been a staff writer at *The New Yorker* since 1999.

1 0

Coal mines closing
by James Kotcon 23 May '15

23 May '15

Murray Energy and Alpha announce over 1600 mining job layoffs in West Virginia. The story highlights the blaming: "Murray Energy cited "the vastly increased use of natural gas in the Ohio Valley to generate electricity," the "ongoing destruction of the United States coal industry by President Barack Obama," and - for the West Virginia workforce cuts - the state's "excessive coal severance tax." But Murray's move comes two months after he invested $1.4 billion to buy Illinois coal reserves. So while he is investing in the competition, he blames Obama and WV's excessive coal severance taxes. The WV Legislature (under new Republican leadership) is currently reviewing our tax structure, and many legislators seem likely to buy into Murray's blaming of Obama and severance taxes, without considering Murray's efforts to shift resources from West Virginia to Illinois. I think we need to highlight this in a response as soon as possible. The two major issues that the Legislature is studying are taxes and roads. A recent roads report suggested several ways to raise money for road repairs, but does not appear to address overweight trucks, or fuel taxes. I think an OP/ED connecting the two issues with the Murray efforts to drain ever more resources from our states to competitors might be well received. Whaddya Tink? Full story is at: http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20150522/GZ01/150529712 Jim Kotcon

5 5

Court says records about WVU mining health research protected
by James Kotcon 23 May '15

23 May '15

Another important news story. See full story at link below. JBK West Virginia does not have an "academic freedom" exemption to its public records law, but certain documents about a former university researcher's examination of mountaintop removal mining's impacts on public health are protected from disclosure as "internal memoranda," the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday in a case brought by Alpha Natural Resources<http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/docs/spring2015/14-0370.pdf>. Justices concluded that "the involuntary public disclosure" of former WVU researcher Michael Hendryx's "research documents" would "expose the decision-making process in such a way as to hinder candid discussion" by university faculty and "undermine WVU's ability to perform its operations." Alpha lawyers had sued to try to force WVU to release thousands of documents<http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20150304/GZ01/150309626> related to a series of papers by Hendryx<http://ohvec.org/issues/mountaintop_removal/articles/health/> that linked mountaintop removal coal mining to increased risk of birth defects, cancer, and a variety of other illnesses among coalfield residents. Among other things, Alpha wanted copies of correspondence between Hendryx, various co-authors, and any outside organizations, such as environmental groups or scientists who peer-reviewed the Hendryx papers. - See more at: http://www.wvgazette.com/article/20150521/GZ01/150529798/1419#sthash.rhBnFR…

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

EC