Greenpeace

As public support for solutions to climate change grows, the theme of last week's G8 and G20 meetings seems to have been a decided lack of urgency to implement solutions to global warming.

The G8 focused on security threats — nuclear proliferation, terrorism — but failed to make any progress on global warming, easily the biggest threat to global peace we're facing. Four paragraphs in the final communiqué were devoted specifically to climate change — including assurances that leaders are “committed to building low carbon and climate resilient economies” and that “climate change remains top of mind” — but no new initiatives or specific actions were announced that would indicate a sense of urgency among the G8 leadership.

The G20 had similarly unimpressive results to show for itself. Some G20 leaders took the first steps towards phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, but collectively the G20 failed to address the urgent need for visionary leadership to stop catastrophic climate change and transition the global economy toward clean, green renewable energy.

Some nations deserve more credit than others. Of all the G20 nations, the US offered up the most robust plan for ending subsidies for big oil and coal, though the plan represents only a fraction of the total subsidies and still requires Congressional approval. At the other end of the spectrum, nations like Australia and Canada failed to take their commitments seriously. In appendices to the communiqué, language suggests that commitments to phase out fossil fuel subsidies are “voluntary and member-specific,” something Canada and Australia have been aggressively pushing for.

One of the best reactions I've read so far, however, is from a colleague over at Greenpeace International, Brian Fitzgerald:

I don't know about you, but the leaders I want to follow aren't the ones who say it's too hard to break the world's addiction to dirty energy. The politicians I want to elect aren't bought off by oil lobbyists. The beaches I want to walk on are not covered in tar balls. The future I want to inhabit isn't black with coal dust and oily scum.

They don't know it yet, but the politicians who sat in last week's G20 meeting and decided to backslide on their commitments to tackle climate change are no longer the most important voices on the planet. It's the people who were outside that meeting calling for an energy revolution. It's the people who have a better idea about what our world can look like, run by energy sources that don't spill, burn, explode, poison, or destroy. Those are the voices we need to listen to, those are the investment paths we need to follow. Real leaders look ahead to the next generation, not the next election. This is what they look like:

Nicole Sands is the Web Producer for Greenpeace USA, based in Gainesville Florida... 

I joined hands today with a whole string of people who gathered to join hands from end to end of Cedar Key's beach on the Gulf of Mexico in Florida, about 50 miles from where I live in Gainesville, Fl. We gathered to draw a line in the sand. It's time to protect our coasts from the dangers of offshore drilling. It's time for an energy revolution — to move away from the reckless energy policy that got us in to this mess.

 

 

I love that this was a grassroots event, sprung from the mind of one person who wanted to make a difference. Floridian Dave Rauschkolb started what today became an international event sponsored by dozens of organizations, including Greenpeace.

He stated:

 

“America could be, should be the world leader in expanding cleaner energy sources yet our political process is paralyzed by oil money.   It is time for our leaders to take bold, courageous steps and open the door to clean energy and renewables and free our country from its addiction to oil.

 

I couldn't agree more.

The Gulf of Mexico is beautiful. It's warm, shallow for miles and the water is crystal clear. It's teeming with life and it's a treasure for Florida and the world. We've gotten ourselves into a situation where as a "solution" we're literally setting the water on fire. We're killing our wildlife, we're poisoning our beaches. We're so clearly and devastatingly on the wrong path. I hope today demonstrated for everyone, that a large number of us are committed to turning it around.

Toronto - world leaders are gathering today to discuss several topics, including how to implement their commitment at their last meeting to phase out fossil fuel subsidies worldwide.

9:34, Monday, June 28

My prediction that some countries would show up with nothing (because I may have seen the leaked document with the commitments from different countries) hits the E&E Daily:

NATIONS: Six countries claim no fossil fuel subsidies -- leaked G-20 report (06/28/2010)

Lisa Friedman, E&E reporter

President Obama and other world leaders yesterday renewed their commitment to phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, but sidestepped specifics about how individual countries would do so and when.
Issuing a final declaration as they wrapped up a Group of 20 economic summit in Toronto, leaders again asked finance and energy ministers to come up with strategies for eliminating assistance for oil and gas production and consumption.

5:21, Sunday, June 27

The G20 Ends

Some G20 leaders have taken first steps towards phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, but collectively, their actions still don't address the urgent need to stop catastrophic climate change.

Read the full blog here on the Huffington Post.

We did it! Thanks to YOU, the Obama Administration kept its promise to save whales at the International Whaling Commission (IWC) talks. As a result, the IWC was unable to lift the ban on commercial whaling!

As I sat in a stuffy meeting room in Agadir, Morocco with delegates and representatives from other nations, I knew I wasn’t alone in working to help save the whales. I had more than 1.5 million passionate people, like YOU, with me there in spirit supporting the whales and standing up to tell the President that they deserve to be saved, not slaughtered.

 

While the gathering nations failed to implement new plans for whale conservation, I’m pleased that our President and his team stood their ground in the end, thanks to your efforts.

This year, the best we could do was preventing the IWC from rolling back protections for whales. Next year, we need to apply even more pressure so the IWC will close dangerous loopholes that have allowed Japan, Iceland, and Norway to continue killing whales.

Thank you for all your support. The whales are breathing a big sigh of relief!

For the whales,
Phil Kline

 

 

In the wake of the unconscionable decision earlier this week by a federal judge in Louisiana to lift the deepwater drilling moratorium, it's good to see Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is talking about taking action. But what we really need is Congressional action to ban offshore drilling.

View more images of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

The Obama Administration should renew its efforts to enforce a ban on new drilling activities. This certainly means that Secretary Salazar should reissue the moratorium with further clarification and justification, and President Obama should appeal the court ruling to the 5th circuit as his administration has promised.

At the same time, Congress needs to enact a drilling ban into law — the moratorium should not have been allowed to lapse in the first place and Congress should take immediate action to ensure that no new drilling occurs.

In order to stop fossil fuels tragedies like the BP Deepwater Disaster once and for all, we need to leave behind the dirty energy of the past and move aggressively toward the clean energy of the future. No more fossil fuels and nuclear energy. We must replace them with clean renewable energy and efficiency technology.

Sign our petition calling on Congress to:

• Enact an immediate ban on all new drilling and phase-out all remaining drilling;
• Remove liability limits for energy-related activities in accordance with the principal that the polluter must pay;
• Improve regulation and oversight of energy-related activities to ensure maximum protection of the public health and the environment;
• And end all subsidies for fossil fuels and nuclear energy and invest in clean renewable energy, efficiency technology, and infrastructure development.

You would be hard pressed to find a director of an environmental group who is more critical than yours truly regarding the gap between President Obama’s visionary campaign messages and his actual leadership on environmental issues.

But I must say that I was impressed when I heard the U.S. government’s position against commercial whaling and any trade of whale products at the International Whaling Commission. While the nations that gathered failed to come to an agreement that could help save whales – largely because countries like Japan refuse to stop slaughtering whales – the President and his team stood their ground in the end.

While campaigning for president, Obama promised Greenpeace that under his leadership, the United States would work to strengthen the international moratorium on commercial whaling. He declared that “allowing Japan to continue commercial whaling is unacceptable.”

 

That promise came under question this year when we received confirmation that the President was supporting a proposal that would have lifted the 24-year ban on commercial whaling. In response, 1.5 million people signed petitions urging the White House to stand up for whales and President Obama, to his credit, listened.  The US statement at the IWC meeting reaffirmed the government's support for whale conservation:
 
"First and foremost, the United States continues to support the commercial whaling moratorium. We strongly oppose lethal scientific whaling – we strongly believe it unnecessary for modern whale conservation and management. In particular, the United States is concerned by whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary, and by the increased international trade and black market trade in whale meat and whale products."

This year, the best we could do was keep the IWC from rolling back protections for whales. Next year, the IWC needs to get serious and close the loopholes that have allowed Japan, Iceland, and Norway to flaunt the moratorium and keep slaughtering whales. As I write this, four Japanese whaling ships are currently navigating the Northwestern Pacific, planning to kill 260 whales by the end of August.

For over thirty years, Greenpeace has been the most outspoken opponent of commercial whaling, taking action to stop the harpooners in their home countries, at sea and in the political arena of IWC meetings and our commitment to bringing about its end in all of our oceans remains. Hopefully by this time next year, we'll be in a position to get the IWC to actually do something positive, instead of having to work like mad just to keep them from moving backwards. Today, the United States stayed true to Obama’s promise to Americans. Today, I feel that hope about the President and our chances to stop whaling that so many felt when President Obama first called on America to share his hope for a better future for our children and grandchildren.

A federal judge in Louisiana stood with the oil industry today and issued an injunction lifting the Obama Administration’s 6-month moratorium on new offshore exploration and existing drilling operations in deep water. Despite the fact that as much as 60,000 barrels of oil continue to pour into the Gulf of Mexico every day, the judge called the moratorium “arbitrary and capricious.”

View more images of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

It would appear there was nothing terribly arbitrary about District Court Judge Martin Feldman’s ruling, however. According to Mother Jones, the most recent financial disclosure forms filed by Judge Feldman show that he held several thousand dollars’ worth of Transocean stock as recently as 2008. Transocean, of course, owned the ill-fated Deepwater Horizon rig, which blew up on April 20th, 2010, killing 11 workers and leading to the massive environmental catastrophe in the Gulf. Feldman also owned stock in several other oil companies.

The Obama Admin’s moratorium suspended drilling at 33 existing deepwater wells and barred any new deepwater drilling permits from being granted. Given the rhetoric happily bandied about by Big Oil types claiming that their technology is far too advanced to permit a catastrophe on the order of, oh, say, the BP Deepwater Disaster from ever occurring, the moratorium was at best a middle-of-the-road solution. It’s quite clear that as oil grows scarcer, the solution is not to drill in ever-more remote and difficult-to-reach places but to aggressively transition off of the dirty stuff and on to clean, green renewable energy.

Download the report (PDF)

We recently released a report, Energy [R]evolution: A Sustainable USA Energy Outlook, that shows exactly how we could do that while leaving dirty, dangerous fossil fuels behind.

Judge Feldman’s ruling was issued in response to a suit filed by several oil companies claiming that they were being unfairly impacted due to the BP Deepwater Disaster. The oil industry’s gross negligence led to the current disaster and many more like it in the past, however, and now they’re trying to pretend that the US federal government has somehow created the current crisis with its moratorium. But it was the oil industry that produced generic cut and paste emergency response plans, relied on a dead technical expert to answer calls, and assured the government that walruses that have not existed in the Gulf for millions of years would not be affected by their operations. This is not a circus and these people can not be allowed to act like clowns pointing their finger at the government and pretending they are not the ones who engineered this disaster.

We have to stand up together against the inordinate influence of Big Oil. The oil industry and other dirty fossil fuels industries can’t be allowed to hijack our energy policy any longer. Help call for an energy revolution by joining a Hands Across the Sand event near you this Saturday.

Twenty years ago, thanks to overwhelming public support, commercial whaling was banned worldwide. But, this wonderful victory that has fostered healthier whale populations and vibrant ecosystems is in serious jeopardy. Right now, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) is meeting in Agadir, Morocco. The fate of whales, worldwide, is in the hands of a few powerful individuals. What will they decide?

For decades, countries like Japan, Norway and Iceland have boldly ignored the ban on commercial whaling, exploiting loopholes and killing about two thousand whales per year.

And, now these pro-whaling countries are on the verge of mounting a major victory. A deal, proposed by the United States and others, would actually legalize commercial whaling for the first time in twenty years! If you’re jaw has dropped to your keyboard, you’re not alone. It’s astonishing, upsetting and totally unacceptable!

Let’s go over the rationalization for this whaling deal. The United States must have a good reason for reopening commercial whaling and encouraging other nations to vote for this deal. The proposed deal would grant commercial quotas to Japan, Iceland and Norway. These quotas would allow these three countries to legally hunt whales for a 10-year period in reduced numbers. The whaling countries in return would agree to tighter oversight of their operations, including participation in a whale DNA registry.

The justification is that the “quotas” for legally whaling is lower than the actual numbers these countries are already killing illegally. In essence, the Obama Administration says whales will be saved.

But, haven’t these three nations already proven that they cannot be trusted to follow the rules? Does anyone really believe these countries are going to adhere to the quotas and no longer catch “extra” whales illegally or under the radar?  And what happens in ten years, when the deal expires and countries like Korea and China want to start killing whales too?

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me!

More than 200 scientists and experts have called on the IWC to maintain its ban on commercial whaling to ensure the future of species depleted by industrial hunting.

They have attested that, "There is no evidence that any of the few populations and species known to be increasing have reached, or are anywhere near, the levels that might justify non-zero catch limits."

The IWC should focus on closing loopholes and actually clamping down on illegal commercial whaling instead of pandering to the “law breakers” and allowing them to derail decades of conservation efforts.

President Obama is skating on very thin ice with environmentalists these days. The Gulf is still spewing oil with no end in sight. Does he really want history books to reflect that under his presidency commercial whaling was legalized and offshore drilling continued even as the biggest oil spill in United States history dragged on for months and months?

Speak up! Send a message to President Obama urging him to protect whales and not the whalers. We have an action alert that will deliver your message directly.

If you feel like calling the White House, you can leave a message for the President at the following phone number: 202-456-1414

 

Today, Greenpeace announced that our citizens’ inspection of the Kuehne Chemical plant near New York City in South Kearny, NJ showed that the two million pounds of Chlorine gas on site puts up to 12 million people in the New York area at risk. This “worst case scenario,” defined by their Risk Management Plan submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency, would occur from the release of just one full rail car of chlorine gas. There could be enough chlorine gas on site at the Kuehne facility to fill 11 rail cars and the Department of Homeland Security has said that a terrorist attack would likely be worse than a worst-case scenario.

The Threat

Imagine a low-lying cloud of lethal chlorine gas spreading through New York City or your home town, stretching 15 miles past your childhood playground, your place of worship, or your friends’ homes. Imagine that you witness the same horror seen by American troops when Hitler used chlorine gas as a weapon: people gasping for air and grasping their throats as fumes melted their lungs and slowly suffocate them. Imagine that your Senator could have done something to prevent this.

Last November the House of Representatives passed a bill that November that would require high-risk chemical facilities to convert to safer chemicals if feasible. Soon afterward Senator Lautenberg pledged to introduce similar legislation in the Senate. We expect that legislation to come out soon and we need the full Senate to take action this summer. If the U.S. Senate fails to act this year, you could be one in three Americans who will remain at risk.

The terrorist attacks on September 11 shocked us all and set into motion the tightening of our security systems. While we’ve added air puffing machines to our airports, metal detectors, x-ray machines, and requirements to take off our shoes, our elected officials have all but ignored the fact that the nation’s dangerous chemical facilities remain unsecured. There are so many of these facilities, that the Department of Homeland Security can only inspect less than 5%  of these plants they themselves have identified as high-risk.

This Risk is Unnecessary

This risk need not exist. This facility, as well as other high-risk facilities around the country, could convert to a safer process. One example is Clorox, the most recognizable name in chlorine products, which has pledged to convert all of its plants over the next few years. Dow Chemical is even converting a facility using “just in time” technology that eliminates large storage of chlorine on site. But even with the 500 or more plants that have converted over the last decade, over 110 million Americans still live within the vulnerability zone of a catastrophic chemical disaster; one-third of our population.

Almost nine years after the worst terrorist attack on American soil in history, our most vulnerable targets remain at risk. Simple, inexpensive, and common sense changes, like substituting or reducing the amount of lethal gases stored on-site, would protect millions of people from harm. As Senator Lieberman said during a hearing earlier this year, safer technologies are “the only fool proof way to defeat a terrorist determined to strike a chemical facility.”  In that same hearing Senator Voinovich of Ohio asked, “What’s the need… is there something that’s going to happen that’s catastrophic?” Well, Senator, you sound like your peers who asked me the same questions when lifting the off-shore oil ban.

We need our Senators to support Senator Lautenberg’s bill and stand up to industry lobbyists, take action by sending a message to you Senator.

Kert Davies, research director for Greenpeace US, appeared recently on The Breakdown, a weekly podcast on TheNation.com. Kert was the architect of ExxonSecrets.org  and is currently running our PolluterWatch.org campaign.

The Breakdown is a newly launched weekly podcast series by Christopher Haynes of TheNation.com. Haynes describes the podcast: “Basically, it's a new model of how readers and citizens can get their tough questions answered by experts and journalists”.

Last week, we saw a frenzy of activity around the oil spill — BP CEO Tony Hayward was grilled by Congress and President Obama addressed the nation for the first time ever from the Oval Office. Still, the situation remains the same in the Gulf — the world continues to watch the oil gush into the Gulf killing and harming precious marine animals and the ecosystems they rely on.

The Breakdown is betting that one question might have crossed a lot of people’s minds: “Is BP unique in its ability to create catastrophe or is the entire practice of offshore oil drilling inherently and equally dangerous regardless of which company is running the rig?”

Kert helps The Breakdown answer that question here, or listen below:

It looks like you don't have Adobe Flash Player installed. Get it now.

HSBC, one of the world’s largest financial institutions, has attempted to position itself as an environmentally responsible bank.  They have a policy not to invest in companies that destroy rainforests.  They offer customers a mutual fund that invests in companies offering climate solutions.  But, HSBC has a big problem.  Their Global Climate Change Fund invests in Sinar Mas, one of the worst rainforests destroying, climate polluting company on the planet!


Believe it or not, Sinar Mas was included in the climate fund with flawed rationale that their palm oil could be turned into a climate-friendly biodiesel.  But, as Greenpeace has repeatedly pointed out, Sinar Mas destroys Paradise rainforests and carbon-rich peatlands to make room for its palm oil plantations, often breaking industry standards and Indonesia law in the process.

In the United Kingdom, Greenpeace exposed this dramatic contradiction to the London-based bank and in the press, but HSBC leadership in London passed the buck.  They said their forest policy did not apply to funds they managed, only their direct investments.  And they said there wasn’t sufficient data to indicate whether Sinar Mas palm oil biodiesel was bad for the climate.  Huh?

In the US, we decided to help motivate the bank with creative activism.  In San Francisco on Tuesday, orangutans showed up on the busy sidewalks in the heart of the financial district.  They, along with their human friends, distributed hundreds of flyers to passersby, and inspired people to make calls to HSBC headquarters.  The orangutans and their friends ended their visit to HSBC with a rousing song entitled “Oh, HSBC” (sung to the tune of “Oh Christmas Tree”).

Oh, HSBC, oh HSBC
    You’re banking with hypocrisy
Green “Climate Fund” now that’s a gas
You’re investing in dirty Sinar Mas
Oh, HSBC, oh HSBC
    You’re banking with hypocrisy

Oh, HSBC, oh HSBC
    You’re banking with hypocrisy
Orangutans running out of luck
They need your help, but you pass the buck
Oh, HSBC, oh HSBC
    You’re banking with hypocrisy

Oh, HSBC, oh HSBC
    You’re banking with hypocrisy
You have a forest policy
But you weasel out with technicalities
Oh, HSBC, oh HSBC
    You’re banking with hypocrisy

Catchy isn’t it?

On Thursday, orangutans visited an HSBC bank in Silicone Valley on the sunny streets of Palo Alto.  Within moments of a banner unfurling and an orangutan “die-in” (orangutans sprawled out, lying on the sidewalk) bank management called the police.  But, since our orangutans were well-behaved and well versed in their rights to free speech and assembly, they were allowed to stay on site, spreading the word and attracting supportive honks from passing motorists…much to the dismay of HSBC management.

Where will the activist apes show up next?  HSBC will have to wait and see!  In the meantime, send your message to HSBC by clicking here.

-Rolf

 

 

A lot of folks who read this blog have been asking how they can get involved in the clean up efforts down in the Gulf of Mexico. In fact, I’ve never seen such an outpouring of sympathy and desire to help before, and it’s really been quite moving. So in the interest of ensuring everyone is getting plugged in to the efforts to clean up the Gulf and stop the next oil spill before it happens, just wanted to post a follow up to my previous “Volunteer info for Gulf oil spill” blog.

As I wrote in that volunteer info post, if you want to get involved directly in the clean up and animal rescue efforts, the best thing to do is get in touch directly with the groups who are coordinating that work. You have to be trained and accompanied by a wildlife expert to assist in animal rescue, for instance, and those groups have experts standing by ready to train volunteers and lead them out into the field on rescue efforts.

Since the first days after the oil started gushing out of BP’s damaged well, Greenpeace has had a team — including independent oil spill experts as well as staffers — on the ground, where they’re reporting the truth about what’s happening in the Gulf — the truth that BP has been trying to hide. We’ve taken many members of the media out on our boats to see for themselves the devastation of the Gulf and its coastal ecosystems. Our phototographers have helped document the real extent of the damage. In order to keep up the sense of urgency, and to keep the pressure on BP, spreading the messages in our oil spill updates or the pictures of the oil spill that show the extent of the damage is a big help.

If you can’t make it down to the Gulf Coast region but want to do something, there is plenty more you can do. The most important thing for those of us not involved in the clean up and rescue efforts is to call on our elected representatives to stop the next spill before it happens. A quick and easy way to help is by taking action right now to tell your members of Congress to ban any and all new offshore drilling.

Of course, simply signing online petitions will not be enough to kickstart an Energy [R]evolution and get us off of dirty fossil fuels like oil once and for all. That’s why we’re partnering with Hands Across the Sand, MoveOn, 350, the Audobon Society, the Sierra Club, and many other organizations on June 26th to hold hundreds of events nationwide where people will join hands to literally draw a line in the sand and say it’s time to end offshore oil drilling and start the clean energy revolution.

Our national organizer, Anna, has the scoop on the Hands Across the Sands events over on our Grassroots Blog: “It’s time to draw a line in the sand.”

Here's a note from Renee, who works in San Francisco as a toxics campaigner trying to encourage electronics companies to go green:

Greenpeace activists have shown up at Dell headquarters in Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Bangalore, and Austin. Plus, more than 40,000 activists around the world have sent emails asking Dell to design out toxics. Dell's hearing your message.

In 2006, Dell committed to eliminating PVC plastic and brominated flame retardants (BFRs) from all their products by 2009. But halfway through 2010, Dell has yet to meet this original deadline and it doesn’t look like this giant electronics company will even meet its new deadline of 2011. It’s clear that Michael Dell is all talk and no action.

Here are answers to some common questions we've heard about why we are pressing Dell and why our Greener Electronics campaign is important.

Why Dell?

Question: Why does Greenpeace care what Dell does - they're not the biggest PC manufacturer, and they're not the worst of them all (Nintendo is)?

Answer: Dell is the 3rd largest computer manufacturer in the world with 12% of the entire market. That adds up to a significant amount of influence over the electronics industry. With HP and Apple already making most (HP) if not all (Apple) of their products free from PVC and BFRs, adding Dell to this list of industry leaders would help pressure the rest of supply chain, and the industry, to eliminate these toxic chemicals once and for all.

What does Dell say?

Question: Why haven't they followed through?

Answer: Thousands of our supporters have emailed Dell about its broken promises on PVC and BFRs. Dell has sent emails back saying they are facing some challenges. However, these challenges have been met with solutions by Dell’s largest competitors including Apple and HP. Apple has completely eliminated PVC and BFRs from all their products and HP has eliminated these chemicals from a significant portion of their products. The solutions and alternatives exist and their supply chain is ready. Dell has run out of excuses.

Are they taking responsibility?

Question: How does Dell make sure that their computers aren't shipped to developing countries? And how much responsibility do they take for the health and environmental damages their products cause?

Answer: Dell was one of the first companies to implement a voluntary take back policy in 2006, which Greenpeace applauded. But today this policy still doesn’t extend to all countries where Dell products are sold. With the growing e-waste problem reaching, by U.N. estimates, 20-50 million tons annually, not taking a global and comprehensive approach to preventing Dell products from ending up in scrap yards is irresponsible.

It is important to remember that having a take back program alone isn’t enough. Without the elimination of PVC and BFRs from all electronics products, Dell is polluting our health and the environment through the use of these chemicals.

Thank You!

I want to thank everyone for spreading the message about Michael Dell and his broken promises. Tweeting, Facebooking, emailing, and calling – Dell is hearing your voice!

If you haven’t already, take action!

And if you have more questions, please post them in the comments.

Greenpeace's team on the Gulf Coast has been taking independent scientists, media teams, and local grassroots organizations out into Barataria Bay, one of the areas hardest hit by the oil disaster, to help assess the full scope of this tragedy and the true cost of our reliance on fossil fuels.  Every day we have been out on the water here, we have been joined by dozens of dolphins, sometimes playing in the distance and sometimes swimming right alongside the Greenpeace boats.

I have spent most of my life living near the ocean, I grew up on the coast of California and also lived on Florida's Gulf Coast. Watching diving pelicans and leaping dolphins has always been a joyful reminder of the wonder of the marine environment, and swimming in the sea gives me a sense of what it means to be a part of this wonderful planet.  But as the oil spreads throughout the Gulf, these have been turned into sad reminders of the immense damage that is being done.

Every time I see a pelican dive for fish here, I wonder how much oil is in the water, and how much is in the fish that it will take back to feed its nesting chicks. Seeing so many dolphins doesn't give us a joyful feeling; the sad reality is that all these dolphins we are seeing here are being pushed up against shore as their habitat is destroyed by millions of gallons of oil, as marine biologist and Greenpeace oceans campaign director John Hocevar explained to the Associated Press on one of our trips.

It gives me a sinking feeling when I think about what it means that seeing dozens of playful dolphins is actually a sign of disaster. It's the same feeling I get when I think about how nice it would be to cool off in the water - but of course the oil on the ocean surface reminds me why we can't. What does it mean when you can't swim in the ocean?

I don’t think anyone entirely knows how to deal with an environmental disaster that just keeps getting worse with no end in sight. Certainly we should stop drilling for oil offshore. But the problem goes deeper than the drill that BP drove into the seabed. Our reliance on fossil fuels like oil and coal isn't just devastating a few ecosystems and local communities, it is driving global warming and acidfying the oceans, threatening the funadmental systems that sustain life on our planet. 

A clean energy revolution could move us away from fossil fuels, but it is going to take more than a speech from the oval office to get us there.  I hope we all take the lessons from the Gulf of Mexico with us as we push for an energy policy that puts people and the planet first and holds polluters accountable for the true cost of dirty and dangerous energy.

Most Americans recognize the BP Deepwater Disaster as the environmental catastrophe that it is and support all efforts being undertaken to hold BP accountable for the damage the company’s negligence has caused to Gulf Coast ecosystems and the livelihoods of Gulf Coast residents. But not Republican Rep. Joe Barton of Texas.

Proving just how out of touch he is with the American public — and how deeply he is in the pocket of corporate polluters like BP — Rep. Barton this morning decried what he sees as a “tragedy of the first proportion” — not, incredibly, the devastation being wrought in the Gulf, but the fact that a corporation like BP should be held accountable for the malfeasance and violation of public trust that caused that devastation by paying into an escrow account to compensate Americans impacted by the oil spill.

It’s really just mindboggling that any elected representative of the people of the USA should be standing up for little ol’ BP at a time when millions of Americans’ livelihoods are being destroyed. But that is exactly what Rep. Barton did.

See for yourself Rep. Barton’s shameful — and shameless — testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee this morning:



Even a fellow Republican lawmaker is calling on Rep. Barton to step down from his post as the ranking minority member of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Many other Republicans have already attempted to distance themselves from Barton’s statement directed to BP CEO Tony Hayward that he is “ashamed” of President Obama’s efforts to hold BP accountable.

But the term “shakedown” has been getting thrown around by a lot of conservative and pro-corporate politicians lately to describe the $20 billion escrow account BP will be creating to compensate Gulf Coast residents affected by the tragedy. So it’s hard to imagine Barton is alone in feeling that the needs of BP should come before the needs of impacted Americans. Makes you wonder: What other politicians elected to represent us are actually more concerned about looking after their corporate donors even in a time of tragedy?

We the people should not stand for this. Since Barton apparently has more sympathy for a rich and powerful CEO of a foreign company than he does for his fellow Americans — whom he was elected to represent — then he absolutely should step down. And every single politician elected to represent Americans should be calling for him to do so.

Fred Ecks, a boat driver out in the Gulf, passed on his impressions of the spill from his first few days down there.

While we were on the water yesterday, there was a "Pan-Pan" radio call from the Coast Guard alerting all mariners to an emergency situation.  There was a fire aboard the Discoverer Enterprise oil collection ship at the Deepwater Horizon site.  This ship collects the oil from the containment cap at the well site.  It was one of those "Oh no, what now" moments.  Thankfully, that fire was put out quickly, but the trouble for wildlife will last a long, long time.

I arrived to the Gulf yesterday morning, and have taken the opportunity to see the Deepwater Horizon tragedy firsthand.  From media reports and photos I knew it would be bad, but I was still unprepared for what I've already seen here.

I'm struck by the quantity of dolphins here.  They are all over the place, all the time.  I've never been anywhere in the world with this many dolphins!  It's heartbreaking to see them all around, swimming in oil-polluted water.

We met some Fish & Wildlife folks on the water yesterday.  They're working to capture oiled birds for cleaning and rehabilitation.  One of the guys explained the process: They identify an oiled bird, and move toward it.  The bird takes flight if it can.  They'll follow the bird for about a minute.  If the bird keeps going, they leave it alone. If it's weak and unable to fly longer, they capture it and bring it in.  The trouble is, by the time a bird has become weakened by the oil, it's suffering liver failure from the toxicity, just like we would.  The focus is on capturing and rehabilitating mating adults rather than chicks, since the chicks often will die before reaching mating age.

The trouble is, there's simply not anywhere nearly enough capacity to save wildlife on this scale.  As one of the Fish & Wildlife guys said, "This is like peeing in the wind."  It feels hopeless, yet they carry on as best they can.

There seems to be confusion as to where the oil will go.  I'm no expert on oil spills, but I'm an experienced boater with knowledge of winds and currents, and I find myself clueless about where to expect oil versus clean water.  Yet even the officials and scientists appear to be suffering the same confusion -- the oil booms will be placed where no oil shows up sometimes, and then there's a mad rush when the oil starts flowing somewhere else.

I'm a little shellshocked by everything I've seen here these past few days.  I can't quite manage to comprehend the magnitude of this problem -- as a compatriot pointed out, this isn't a spill, it's a spew; it doesn't stop!  I sure hope we can at least quickly reach a point of stopping the spew.  I don't even want to think about the looming hurricane season.

Let's all keep Obama's and BP's focus on this disaster!

Take action and tell Congrees that now is the time for a permanent ban on ALL new drilling.

Greenpeace’s Energy [R]evolution is an in-depth analysis of how we can move successfully to clean, renewable energy by 2050 while leaving dirty, dangerous fossil fuels behind. We teamed up with scientists, engineers, universities and institutes from around the world to draft this blueprint for how we get from where we are now to a green and peaceful future — in other words, where we need to be.

We are now happy to announce that we have rolled out an Energy [R]evolution iPhone app so you can access our report on the go! The future now fits right in your pocket.

Here are some of the app's key features:

• Provides a shorter, lighter and more concise version of the report.
• Find out all that you could ever want to know about the report in our FAQ section.
• Provide a boost to the [R]evolution by using the quick signup tool and taking actions online. (*Note: By signing up through the app, you'll get Greenpeace International's monthly newsletter and action alerts. Sign up for Greenpeace USA's monthly newsletter and action alerts here.)
• The app also provides an opportunity to make contributions to support Greenpeace's work to ensure the Energy [R]evolution becomes a reality.

You can read more about the app here or download the app now and be a part of the Energy [R]evolution!

(Please note, however, that the app is for the global scenario specifically. You can find out more about our sustainable energy scenario for the USA here.)

President Obama's Oval Office speech tonight could be a turning point of historical significance for his legacy, America's security, and the world that we leave our children. Will President Obama give a grandiose speech followed by more politically expedient baby-steps, or will he set America on a new path?

View more images of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Tonight, the President owes America the unflinching, spin-free truth: The only way to avoid more fossil fuel disasters is to move aggressively away from dangerous energy sources like oil and coal. We have all seen the devastating pictures from the Gulf: ruined beaches, oil-slicked birds, dead and dying marine life. I have witnessed it first hand. It is a mess we can't clean up. No matter what you hear, the best-case scenario is that we clean up 5-10% of the oil.

This is a turning point of immense historical significance. If we miss the turn, we miss the chance to grab our future with both hands. For President Obama to show the leadership that people dreamed he would when sweeping him into office, he needs to declare a new Apollo program, the moon mission that invests in energy efficiency, clean energy, electric cars, public transportation, geothermal energy and safe biofuels that will help kick our oil addiction by 2030. President Obama must stand in the Oval Office tonight and turn away from apologies, excuses, and finger pointing to seize this moment for America's future.

Read more on Huffington Post

On May 20, Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kean, leaders of the 9-11 Commission, told a Congresssional committee that six years after the commission completed its work, the federal government has not taken the steps needed to implement the commission’s recommendations.

The next day, President Barack Obama announced the formation of a commission to investigate the Deepwater Horizon blowout oil disaster and the safety of offshore drilling.  He appointed former Florida Senator Bob Graham (D) and former EPA Administrator William Reilly to head the panel.

Flash forward ten years. It’s 2020. Will Sen. Graham and Mr. Reilly be sitting before a Congressional committee, testifying that, six years after their commission completed its work, the federal government still has not acted on the key recommendations of its report?

The high water level is marked in oil on the grasses of Grand Terre Island, Louisiana June 14, 2010. View more images from the BP Deepwater Disaster and oil spill.

Of course the more immediate concern is: Will the commission even make the right recommendations about America's energy future?

“Blue ribbon” commissions aside, there is one striking similarity between the 9-11 attacks and the BP Gulf of Mexico disaster: in each case the sitting president found himself with significant support from the American public to take bold steps to remedy the situation. George Bush squandered his moment, using the 9-11 tragedy to launch opportunistic wars. What will Obama do with his moment?

So far, the BP Deepwater Disaster commission is not off to a good start. Three weeks after the formation of the commission was announced, the seven-member panel still lacks three members. Of the four named, two — Mr. Reilly and Alaska’s Fran Ulmer — have strong oil industry ties.

Mr. Reilly is on the Board of Directors at Conoco-Phillips. In an August 2009 sale, Conoco-Phillips finished second — right behind BP — in snapping up deepwater leases in the Gulf of Mexico. Surely, Conoco has an interest in seeing deepwater drilling continue.

Ms. Ulmer, Alaska’s former lieutenant governor and outgoing chancellor of the University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA), has a long history of accepting campaign contributions from the oil industry, including contributions from BP going back to her 1990 candidacy for the Alaska House of Representatives. As chancellor of UAA, Ms. Ulmer presided over the stifling of marine conservationist and oil spill expert, Professor Rick Steiner, who was harassed into resigning over his warnings about the environmental hazards of offshore drilling.

As if that doesn’t cast enough doubt on the impartiality and independence of the commission, last Friday Mr. Obama’s energy and climate czar, Carol Browner, told The Hill that she hopes the administration can persuade the yet-to-be-named commissioners to curtail the six-month moratorium on offshore drilling.

As Ms. Browner was busy undermining the commission, Louisiana’s Sen. Mary Landrieu (D), Congress’s top recipient of BP campaign contributions in the 2008 election cycle ($17,000), sent a letter to the White House claiming that the six-month moratorium will mean the loss of 38,000 jobs. Which begs two questions: 1) Did Ms.. Landrieu take into account the effect of Gulf cleanup jobs? And 2) Why not just send the bill to BP?

Across the environmental movement, activists are cringing with anticipation that Mr. Obama will use the catastrophe in the gulf to justify more loan guarantees to the nuclear industry. Even though the documented carelessness and incompetence of nuclear engineers rivals their oil industry counterparts, the nuclear crowd doesn’t have an active disaster up and running this week.

President Obama has a unique opportunity to have a “clean slate” discussion with Americans about energy policy. Will he bungle his chance the same way President Bush did? If the establishment of commissions is any guide, the outlook isn’t hopeful.

An astonishing sight was to be seen the other day on the shores of Louisiana, where offshore oil workers, sidelined by the U.S. Government’s moratorium issued in response to the BP Deepwater Disaster, were clamoring to resume work on their rigs. The dissonance between the risks and rewards of this dangerous livelihood and the health and welfare of all of our lives is drastic.

View more images from the BP Deepwater Disaster and oil spill

These workers are not to blame for this dissonance. The overconsumption of our lifestyles and our nation’s idiotic energy policies are to blame, as well as some villainous oil lobbyists and a Congress that does not have the courage to stand up to the largest polluters nor to tell the truth about our urgent need to change our environmental ways.

These off-shore oil workers will likely have to move to other parts of the country for work, and it probably won’t pay as well. (Perhaps dangerous cleanup or rigging jobs will still exist.) Also, most of the Gulf Coast’s normal businesses will be shuttered. Tourism and fishing and all the businesses that depend on healthy coastlines will be harmed for generations – if not forever – by this sickening oil spill.  

We always talk about a transition to a clean energy economy, but treat it like a philosophical problem instead of the most urgent undertaking we have. These workers are standing next to a catastrophe caused by their work and they still demand to go back because they need jobs and money. The time for philosophical musing or political jockeying lapsed over ten years ago.

We have a global emergency.

We must transform our economy, retrain works, and retrofit and build new infrastructure. We must create a real Energy Revolution... NOW.

This post comes from Willie at Greenpeace UK.

So, what's your price to sell out the whales?

Some envelopes stuffed with cash? A nice big check for development aid? All-expenses paid trips to exotic locations? Or some dubious entertainment, including 'good girls'?

Welcome, dear friends, to the world of international diplomacy, Japanese government style. Yesterday, in a shocking expose, the Sunday Times showed the tawdry reality of Japan's vote-buying tactics to undermine the International Whaling Commission (IWC). Using undercover reporters, they managed to elicit scandalous accounts of just what the government of Japan offers to get the support of developing nations in the Caribbean, the Pacific, and Africa.

Greenpeace and other environmental groups have been banging on about this for years, but never have the salacious details been quite so vividly exposed. It's further proof, if any were needed, that there is no groundswell of support for whaling within the IWC or the international community. Indeed, many of the national representatives attending these talks don't represent their governments, their people, or any sort of scientific advice when it comes to deciding how to vote. Japan's support instead is held together with wads of cash, tied overseas aid, and some dubious entertainment of key officials.

Is this what we expect from the international body responsible for looking after the world's whale populations?

Given the depths the government of Japan will apparently plumb to secure votes at the IWC, it doesn't take a genius to work out that similar things are probably happening in other fora. To help defeat a trade ban on Atlantic bluefin for example.

It makes a mockery of any countenance of a compromise deal that would sanction and legitimise Japan's whaling program, to know that the perceived international support has such sordid origins.

And it further brings into question just what the Japanese taxpayers must be thinking. Not only do they unwittingly pay to support the whaling operations, and public campaigns to encourage the consumption of whale meat, but their money is also being used to bribe developing nations to support this dying industry. An industry so few people in Japan even care about.

Perhaps most sickening is that Japanese taxpayers are also paying for the politically-motivated trial of anti-whaling activists, including the Greenpeace activists known as the Tokyo Two. Their 'crime' was to uncover corruption at the heart of the whaling industry, and they now face the very real prospect of one-and-a-half years in prison.

Given the amount of corruption the Sunday Times has uncovered at the heart of the Japanese government's international diplomatic efforts, it's clear it's not our activists who should be in the dock.

Take action and tell President Obama to say NO to commercial whaling. 

Greetings from Grand Isle, Louisiana, one of the growing number of places unlucky enough to win a "heavily oiled" classification on the government maps tracking the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Despite BP's efforts to keep it under wraps, we're here to document the impacts of the spill. The public has a right - and a responsibility - to know the true cost of our continued reliance on offshore oil, and fossil fuels in general.

Yesterday we saw part of the evidence of that cost. Walking through Grand Isle State Park, we came across a tidal flat that was littered with tens of thousands of dead hermit crabs. It was a depressing scene, and took me all the way back to my first visit to the beach, over 35 years ago, when discovering hermit crabs at Rocky Neck State Park in Connecticut helped inspire a life-long love of the ocean.

Now, I realize it can seem a little odd to wax poetically about hermit crabs when we're talking about the biggest environmental disaster in North American history. As John Stewart pointed out on the Daily Show, entire communities along the Gulf Coast are reeling right now, and many species - sea birds, turtles, and even a population of sperm whales - are being pushed to the brink of extinction. Why should anyone care about a few hermit crabs?

The problem is that it's all connected. Hermit crabs may not be quite as cute as sea turtles or as strikingly beautiful as roseate spoonbills, but they are a bellwether for the health of the Gulf of Mexico. Hermit crabs stay largely out of site, eking out a living in sandy and marshy sand and mud. When the sediment fills up with oil, so do the shells of the hermit crabs, and they suffocate. So if all the hermit crabs on a beach die, it's pretty safe to say that the entire top layer of sand is full of oil - and no longer able to sustain life other than bacteria.


And it doesn't stop there, because hermit crabs are an important part of marine food webs, particularly in the Gulf of Mexico. Shore birds like spoonbills, egrets, and herons feed heavily on hermit crabs, and so do nurse sharks, flounders, and many other types of fish. Whether they feed on oiled hermit crabs and are poisoned by the toxic mix of oil and chemical dispersants or go hungry because large portions of their food supply have succumbed to this disaster, the impacts of the hermit crab die off we saw last night don't end with the hermit crabs.

The true cost of oil doesn't end at the gaspump.

For the oceans,
John Hocevar

 

If we’ve learned anything from the BP Deepwater Disaster, it’s that we can’t afford not to transition to clean renewable energy and get off of dirty fossil fuels pronto.

The American public knows that: 71% of Americans now support regulating greenhouse gas emissions according to a new poll. And some 72% oppose new offshore drilling according to another. So the fact that the Senate defeated Alaskan Sen. Lisa Murkowski's pro-coal, pro-oil, anti-regulation, anti-envronment bill by such a narrow margin is a bit of a shock.

Let me just say straight out that it's certainly good news that the Senate voted the right way. But it should have been a blowout, not 53 to 47. The Senate is, obviously, well behind the public in terms of being in touch with reality about America’s energy future.

With images like those in this video making headlines on a daily basis, it's beyond me how 47 Senators could still vote on behalf of Big Oil to preserve the status quo:


You can read our full response to the vote on Senator Murkowski’s Dirty Air Act for more. And if you still think that oil spills are just somehow a regrettable side effect of what is otherwise a completely necessary reliance on oil as an energy source, you haven't checked out our Energy [R]evolution report yet, which shows how we can leave fossil fuels behind while transitioning to a sustainable energy economy.

At the end of the day, of course, it’s not what’s on the scoreboard that matters but whether you have another loss or win in the standings. We chalked up another win for the environment yesterday, but you can bet the fossil fuel industry’s other champions are already lining up to finish the task of gutting the Clean Air Act on behalf of big polluters that Murkowski started.

The next attack against the Clean Air Act in the Senate will likely be launched by Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, a coal country Democrat who has the support of other Democratic Senators that actually voted against Murkowski’s Dirty Air Act. So stay tuned, given the deep pockets of our fossil fuels opponents and their allies in Congress, it’s going to take plenty of teamwork to chalk up the next victory for the environment.

For the last month, I have opened my computer each morning with a sigh and often a cringe. It’s the way that I have been starting my day for weeks now.

Scouring the homepages of news web sites is pat of my morning routine, as regular as my cup of coffee. Being informed is a human natured comfort; something that leaves you a little more prepared to tackle the day ahead.

Lately however, I have grown afraid of what the headlines at the top of each web page read. I know one or more of them will be an update on the oil spill and I have grown accustom to being afraid of what will come next. I cringe to see the latest estimate of gallons, how an attempt to cap the leak has failed, another insensitive quote from Tony Hayward, or photos of white birds with wings and bodies slicked in burnt orange. Beginning my days with these things has made the desire to be informed somewhat of a burden.

I am usually a mess by 10 a.m.

Weary. Tired. Hopeless. Nervous.

Yesterday, the latest main headline scrolled across many news organization’s web sites announced that BP was indeed moving forward to burn large amounts of oil. Immediately, I am flooded with mixed emotions. This time it’s anger, curiosity and fear. Is this really the best option? Can we not devise any other alternative? Is it safe for the environment or others in the Gulf? Is this a half-baked idea, decided under overwhelming pressure and haste?

According to an Associated Press story, BP will devise a burning rig and use a device called the EverGreen Burner to turn the flow of oil into a vapor and then is burned. Perhaps if this was exactly how it occurred, it was safe and environmentally friendly, I would feel more comfortable about this being a possible solution.

But there are a lot of risks to consider.

Environmental:

The first are the environmental effects of this process. What will be the consequences of vaporizing the crude oil that has already made people sick and killed animals? Documents from Total E&P, a multinational energy company, said that the burning oil that would release sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxides and methane would pose a “moderate risk to the environment.”

Moderate by definition means average or temperate. But can this term really be used in relation to environmental damage or health? The risks of the toxins being released into the environment from the burning oil are not exactly what I would call moderate.

Consider the details of some of the chemicals that will be released into the air from the oil being burned:

• Nitrous Oxides: These are greenhouse gases and ozone depleters that account for 6% of the heating effect in the atmosphere. They are also significant contributors to the formation of smog, which has an affect on the lives of both plant life and cause respiratory problems in humans. 
• Sulfur Dioxide: One of the releases that could come from burning the oil is Sulfur Dioxide, a compound known to also cause serious respiratory diseases, hinder breathing, and has the potential to lead to premature death. Both Nitrous Oxides and Sulfur Dioxide are also causes of acid rain, an occurrence that has damaged rivers, lakes, soil, forests, plants, animals and human health.
• Methane: It is a greenhouse gas that is 25 times more potent than CO2. Methane is often produced from decay in landfills and the digestive process of animals.

The effects of these compounds on the environment are severe and lasting. It’s clear that burning the oil and the results of the event should not be taken lightly.

Safety:

Additionally, safety of people needs to be considered. The oil spill has already been the cause of 11 people’s deaths and now is possibly making the people cleaning it up sick.

For instance, the reliability of the equipment being used in this burning effort should also be questioned.

According to the Associated Press, it is unclear about how many times this "EverGreen Burner” has been used in situations such as this. It seems like this fact alone should have experts questioning whether or not it is safe to use this kind of equipment in an already dangerous situation.

BP also said it would be careful not to allow the flames and heat to endanger other vessels. Can this be guaranteed?

We take a risk of an oil spill occurring every day that we continue to drill offshore. Today, by using a technique to clean up a spill that is also an environmental and safety hazard, we could be exacerbating the effects of this event. Perhaps burning the oil can be done in a safe and effective way. Perhaps it is the best solution to remove the underwater islands in the Gulf.

However, we must be sure of that before decisions are made from haste and panic. BP was clearly irresponsible with the running of the Deepwater Horizon before this disaster happened. The company should be held to environmentally responsible standards when cleaning up the pieces.

Cindy Baxter is in Bonn, Germany and filed this report about the UN climate talks taking place.

As BP's oil continues to gush into the Gulf of Mexico, I'm sitting here in Bonn at the first full round of climate talks since the fiasco in Copenhagen.

Greenpeace has been bearing witness to the BP Deepwater Disaster and oil spill. Click here to read more blogs, view videos and more images.

We are doing our best to get this lot to make some progress and get an agreement that will prevent dangerous climate change.

But there are others here with a different view. The oil industry. The coal industry. The corporate lobby that whispers in Government ears — especially in the industrialized world.

The head of BP Germany and his political adviser have been here, as part of the Federation of German Industries´ delegation.

The Federation of German Industries is part of the Europe-wide business lobby trying to stop the EU from shifting its emissions reductions target from a paltry 20% to 30% by 2020, a shift that would provide the leadership that still appears to be missing in terms of getting to a strong deal to save the climate.

BP is not alone — Shell and Exxon are also here in Bonn, but none of them seem to be pushing for anything other than a business-as-usual future, a future choked by the polluting emissions from oil and coal.

I read today that BP´s 2009 response plan for the Gulf of Mexico lists a scientist who died in 2005 as one of their wildlife experts. It includes plans for rescuing walrus, sea lions, otters and seals, none of which live anywhere near the Gulf. Did they cut and paste it from an Alaska impact assessment?

So if that´s the quality of the information coming from one of the world´s largest companies, why should Governments believe the arguments put forward by their lobbyists?

Estimates are that the amount of oil spilled into the Gulf to date is around five days of US oil use. A strong climate deal would help us move to the clean energy future we need — or, as someone put it rather well the other day — we need “petroleum rehab." Now. Fast. More drilling for oil just ain´t gonna do that.

Ultimately, if that oil hadn´t spilled into the Gulf, it would end up in the sky. Neither is a sustainable option.

Time to end this madness?

Did you know that your refrigerator contains super greenhouse gases? These gases – called HFC or F-gas refrigerants– are a growing piece of the global warming problem.  They are 1400 times more powerful at warming the climate than carbon dioxide and Greenpeace has been working to eliminate them ever since they were introduced in the early 1990s.  And we did eliminate them in Europe, Asia, and South America.

It looks like we could finally see a major breakthrough on this front in the U.S..   
Help make sure this happens!

Recently, EPA proposed a new rule that would allow climate-friendly hydrocarbon refrigerants in the U.S. Until now hydrocarbons have been illegal here because of an outdated set of EPA regulations that restrict the types of refrigerants that can be used.

The U.S. is actually trailing most of the rest of the world in refrigeration technology. Back in 1993 Greenpeace developed a hydrocarbon refrigerator – called GreenFreeze - and so far Europe, Asia and many other regions have transitioned to this technology. Not only is it free of super-greenhouse gases, but the hydrocarbons are actually more efficient coolants, and can reduce the amount of energy needed to run the refrigerator as well.

Today 40% of global refrigerator production is GreenFreeze, and nearly 400 million units have sold in total worldwide – but none in the U.S.

Until now.

With EPA’s new rule, manufacturers could soon be allowed to sell GreenFreeze in the U.S. Some companies have already expressed their interest.  This means that when it comes time to buy your next refrigerator, you could buy one that is climate-friendly and possibly more efficient too.

But the rule is so far just a proposal, and it took years for EPA to even get this far. And there are other cooling sectors – like air conditioning – that have similar climate-friendly options that EPA hasn’t addressed yet.

We need to encourage EPA to take the next steps to finalize this rule ASAP and urge them to also consider similar action in other cooling sectors soon.  

EPA is accepting public comments on the rule until July 9th, so act now to let them know that you want to be able to buy GreenFreeze in the U.S!

 

Join us as we take an insider look at leading supermarkets to see how they're coping with their status as ocean destroyers. Will their support group help them realize they have a problem and begin to make improvements? Or, will they spiral further towards the bottom of the barrel? In the latest edition of Ocean Destroyers Anonymous, the group focuses on the 'Six Steps to Recovery.' Trader Joe's attempts to mentor Costco and Meijer reveals a secret 'embrace.'

Recent scientific studies have shown that 90 percent of the world’s top predatory fish have disappeared, and that unless current fishing practices change, global fish stocks will collapse by the middle of this century. Supermarkets ring up nearly $16 billion in seafood sales every year, and much of it is caught or raised unsustainably. Supermarkets have a responsibility to their customers and the environment to avoid trading in seafood from destructive fisheries and fish farms.

By encouraging supermarkets to keep red listed seafood off the shelves, the oceans can become healthier and more robust.

We deserve to purchase seafood from supermarkets that care about the condition of our oceans. The days of selling fish with no regard for the environment are over. As a consumer, you can help support seafood sustainability and ocean protection. Flex your power as a consumer. Tell the largest U.S. supermarket retailers to adopt sustainable seafood policies, stop selling destructively fished seafood, and provide informative labeling so customers, like us, can choose the most sustainable seafood and avoid the most imperiled fish.

President Obama asked yesterday "whose ass to kick" over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. I have a few ideas.

1. Tony Hayward. BP CEO Tony Hayward and his company should be criminally charged for the reckless endangerment of their workers, for violations of the Clean Water Act by dumping millions of gallons of oil into the Gulf, and for stealing the income of the people who rely on the Gulf for their livelihoods. Instead, seven of my colleagues are being aggressively charged with felonies for peacefully calling on the President to stop offshore Arctic drilling. Arrest the real criminals.

2. Lisa Murkowski. Senator Lisa Murkowski is just one of many of our elected officials who seem to be working for the fossil fuel industries instead of in the interest of the American people. As the Gulf Region watches in horror at the impacts of the oil spill on its coasts, its waters, and its economy, the US Senate is scheduled to consider a proposal tomorrow from Senator Lisa Murkowski that would protect oil companies and other big polluters by gutting America's Clean Air Act.

3. His Own and His Staffs'. Obama and his top staff must take responsibility for their distinct lack of vision in a time of oil, national security, and climate crises, clinging to weak Senate climate legislation instead of pivoting towards a vision of getting the U.S. off of oil by 2030. A smart first step would be to call for all cars to be plug-in electrics by 2030.

 

 

The Energy [R]evolution

To eliminate the risks of another BP Deepwater Disaster, we must look away from the dinosaur fossil fuel companies of our past and towards a bright future of clean, renewable energy. It is possible right now to make the changes we need for that future. Don't believe those who tell you that it's too hard or too expensive.

Read more at Huffington Post >>

The best way to stop oil spills from happening is pretty simple, actually: Leave the oil in the ground where it belongs.

If you think that's not possible, or that it would mean shivering in the dark, or that millions of people would have to go without energy and jobs, you'd probably be forgiven for thinking that. That's the line that Big Oil and King Coal have been feeding us. But it's wrong on all counts.

Read more and download the report (PDF)

We teamed up with more than 30 scientists and engineers from universities, institutes, and the renewable energy industry to create our new report, Energy [R]evolution: A Sustainable USA Energy Outlook. The report lays down a blueprint for how we ensure our emissions peak by 2015, as the Nobel prize-winning IPCC says they must if we’re to avoid runaway global warming, while phasing out nuclear and fossil fuel energy. It shows how we can provide about 96% of our electricity from renewable sources by 2050, and in the process create 1.1 million jobs in the renewables sector alone by 2030.

Why a [r]evolution? Moving from the dirty fossil fuels of the past and onto the clean, green renewable energy sources of the future requires an evolution AND a revolution. (And yes, electronics geeks, that’s the symbol for [r]esistance there as well.)

We need a [r]evolution because business as usual is not going to stop the tens of thousands of barrels of crude oil spilling into our waters, scores of workers losing their lives to accidents in coal mines around the world, or the countless other disasters we are all facing due to our reliance on dirty energy.

Despite all the evidence that we’re paying far too high a price for our dependence on fossil fuels, Alaskan Senator Lisa Murkowski is trying to roll back the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions — a critical tool in making the Energy [R]evolution a reality.

Your Senators can help jumpstart the energy revolution by defeating Murkowski's Dirty Air Act and having the courage to end our dependence on coal and oil. Write to them now.

Yesterday in Aomori, Japan the trial of whale defenders Junichi and Toru — the "Tokyo Two" — came to a close.

During the long trial, the defense outlined the meticulous investigation by Junichi and Toru into whale meat embezzlement, and in this way put whaling on trial. Whistleblowers and even hostile witnesses corroborated the evidence the Tokyo Two found in 2008. The evidence has been overwhelming and would under normal circumstances in any democracy would lead to an acquittal. The request by the prosecution for 18 months in jail is outrageous and politically motivated. If imposed, the sentence would be the longest jail term for any Greenpeace activist — ever. The Japanese government is aware of the evidence put forth in this case and the outpouring of support for the innocent activists, yet they continue to try to silence the Tokyo Two to support their whaling program.

Not only have outraged and sympathetic citizens taken action on behalf of the Tokyo Two worldwide, but human rights groups, and legal experts and politicians including Desmond Tutu have condemned the unjust arrest of the Tokyo Two.

Even the United Nations Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention stated that the 26-day detention of Junichi and Toru violated their human rights. How can Japan request jail time when it has already violated the the rights of the Tokyo Two through their detention? A request for jail time is a disrespect to accepted international human rights standards, and not to mention, disproportionate to the alleged crime of taking a box.

We acted peacefully and only in the public interest – to gain evidence of embezzlement of whale meat paid for by the Japanese public. As a signatory to international human rights treaties, Japan must uphold our right to take such action and we trust the court will recognise this in its decision.” -- Junichi Sato.

The demand for jail comes just as crucial talks are to begin at the International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting in Morocco where Japan deals internationally to continue its corrupt whaling program. Around the world people are calling for an end to whaling and an end to the prosecution of the Junichi and Toru, two of the boldest whales and oceans defenders. TAKE ACTION! Demand justice for the Tokyo Two and the whales.

Friday is a day that just might live in climate infamy. On Thursday, Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski will introduce her "resolution of disapproval" (S.J.Res. 26), aka the “Dirty Air Act.” Take action now and urge your Senator to vote against the Dirty Air Act. The goal of this Amendment is to take away the power of the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate dangerous greenhouse gases.

Seems strange. Where have I heard this issue before?

Well, the Supreme Court for one. In 2007, the Supreme Court offered its decision in Massachusetts vs. EPA (549 U.S. 497), which interpreted Section 202(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act’s seemingly non-discretional language. The Court found that Section 202 required the EPA Administrator to regulate carbon dioxide and other harmful gases that “in his judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”

The EPA responded to the Court’s remand with an endangerment finding, which enabled them to draft new standards to curb greenhouse gases while simultaneously raising mileage standards.

Higher mileage standards mean less pain at the pump for the consumer, less carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and a greater role for industry to innovate. Seems too good to be true.

However, Murkowski’s resolution would overturn the EPA’s endangerment finding, thereby gutting the Clean Air Act. Also, this would have the effect of rolling back the agreement struck by the Obama administration, NHTSA and EPA to increase light duty vehicles efficiency standards, reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by 2016.

Despite this, Murkowski and her co-sponsors are pushing an industry-lobbyist written amendment to reverse this decision legislatively by stripping the EPA’s ability to regulate harmful greenhouse gases.

Something just doesn’t seem right about Murkowski’s actions. Sure, Greenpeace has shown exactly how wedded to polluting industries Murkowski is during our Polluter Harmony campaign. Yeah, Murkowski has been continually criticized for the cozy links between her and energy lobbyists at Bracewell & Guliani (this legislation came from one of those links). And so what if she takes hundreds of thousands of dollars from the polluting energy industry.

Despite these egregious ethical failings, I think that something else is going on here.

This vote is about whether the Senate supports the President.

If the Senate votes to stop EPA action on climate change, they will be removing Presidential powers – a move obviously designed to show disapproval of the Executive's judgment and prerogative to develop rules and enforce the law. This is a vote of distrust.

Second, because the vote is about removing Presidential authority, it is also going to be an indication about whether the Democrats can organize themselves or not. So, it might be useful to remind leadership that if Murkowski wins, Obama looks weak.

Especially at this late stage, the leaders with the most clout and interest in rallying the necessary votes to defeat Murkowski's Dirty Air Act should be President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Despite the uncapped, massive volume of oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico, if Murkowski’s Dirty Air Act goes forward, the US will use 450 million more barrels of oil by blocking new clean car standards. (See: Lisa Jackson’s Testimony before Energy and Commerce Committee, April 28, 2010). Also, by having less efficient vehicles, the American people are losing billions at the gas pump. We need Obama and Reid to lead us toward an end to our addiction to fossil fuels.

Now is not the time to make us more dependent upon polluting fossil fuels, while simultaneously eliminating the ability of the EPA to regulate the very emissions that they make.

This post is by Molly Dorozenski, a Greenpeace USA media officer who is on the ground in Louisiana bearing witness to the impacts of the BP Deepwater Disaster and oil spill.

Last Friday, I found myself in Pensacola, Florida getting ready to greet the oil as it hit Florida’s white sand beaches. But just as I arrived, we started hearing reports that the oil had arrived in unprecedented amounts in Barataria Bay, and the barrier islands that served as breeding grounds for the area’s birds.

The very first photographs of oil-covered pelicans had started to hit the newspapers. As BP’s latest attempt to stem the oil flow seemed to be succeeeding, we were seeing the beginning of the worst effects of the oil spill we had seen yet — plainly suffering wildlife that cannot be protected or rescued fast enough.

River Shay walks his dog Smash in the front yard of his Grand Isle, Louisiana house planted with crosses with the names some of the marine life, seafood dishes and recreational activiites that are being lost due oil leaking from the Deepwater Horizon wellhead in the Gulf of Mexico. © Jose-Luis Magana/Greenpeace View more images of the oil spill on Flickr

Grand Isle is a vacation and weekend fishing spot for Louisianans, a long pretty stretch of sand scattered with small motels and cottages with cheerful names and marinas at either end. What would be a place of leisure has been totally transformed — a newly-erected symbolic graveyard for everything this community has lost, courtesy (they say) of BP and the federal government: “Sandcastles,” “Seafood Gumbo,” “Sea Turtles” “Redfish” — dozens of white crosses with different labels. Down at the marina, there are folks who have been coming to Grand Isle for years — they can no longer fish or swim, but they’re coming here anyway. They’re dumbstruck. The beaches of Grand Isle are patroled by BP and closed to the public — you can see the workers from a walkway at Grand Isle State Park where locals and media have lined up to watch oil shoveled endlessly into bags.

A little ways off by boat — not more than a 10-minute boat ride — you can visit Queen Bess Island, home to the endangered Brown Pelican, a bird that has recovered from past population problems related to pesticides. When we visited, the island was surrounded by booms and boats couldn’t get very close, but you could count probably 10-15 pelicans that were partly or fully covered in oil. Many of them would not survive the night. Since we’re not trained to rescue them ourselves, we called in what we had seen to wildlife rescue — we know that teams are going back and forth to the islands, but it’s frustrating to see no rescue teams there. You just feel helpless.

At Grand Terre, a bigger nearby island, the beach was covered in oil.  It was on the sand, and there were thick pools of it along the edge in the water. Dirty sorbent booms had washed up on the shores, totally saturated in oil. Again, we saw no BP workers — where are the 20,000 workers that President Obama says are out here cleaning up this mess? And aren’t we all tired of cleaning up after dirty energy? When will we have an energy policy that protects the things we love from catastrophes like this? This has to be the moment of change, unless we want to see this and feel like this again and again.

The locals here know that it’s going to be a long time, decades, before Grand Isle is the place that they remember. This is the new Gulf Coast. You can’t clean it up much at all, and the little that could be done isn’t being done fast enough. As the oil spreads through the Gulf tainting the waters, the islands, and the wildlife, BP and the President stand up at press conferences and tell us they’re doing all they can. But we’ve seen the truth and it’s not pretty — it’s a failed energy policy, a failed response, and a failure of humanity.

Some say that Bonn is going as well as the the Bali negotiations in 2007 were going at this point in the process. The negotiators may soon have a negotiating text ready for the next round of talks, happening in Bonn this August. The most troublesome negotiating text regards “land use, land use change, and forestry” (also known as LULUCF), which contains a loophole large enough to negate all the pollution cuts under Kyoto.

Wealthy countries are scheming to include tricky accounting to avoid reducing global warming pollution. Developing countries are working hard to fix this loophole.

While negotiators are making progress in many other areas, the LULUCF shenanigans beg the question: Is everyone negotiating in good faith?

Comparing Bonn to Bali seems far-fetched. The Bali climate summit resulted in the Bush administration agreeing to a 2-year plan to culminate in a global climate agreement covering all the key issues. The Bali Action Plan deadline was the meeting in Copenhagen last December, and we saw how that turned out.

The Bush administration was filled with climate deniers and probably would not have cared so much that Copenhagen failed. President Obama, on the other hand, cared a lot about the outcome of Copenhagen, and I believe him when he says he wants the US to be part of a global climate treaty. Nonetheless, the Obama administration’s perspective and strategy on the international climate negotiations remains curious.

The US government pointed to the Copenhagen Accord as a laudable outcome of Copenhagen, as well as the result of US leadership. But this Accord did not really fulfill the Bali Action Plan. All countries did not sign it, and it was not a legal document. There are two reasons why the US having praised Copenhagen relates to problems with the negotiating strategy now in Bonn, especially since they keep bringing up the Accord.

The Copenhagen Accord really was a summary of all the political progress that had been made since Bali. Large developing countries like China, Brazil, and India for the first time announced targets and deadlines for reducing global warming pollution and protecting forests. Wealthy countries announced significant financial contributions, for helping poor countries adapt to the effects of climate change caused by wealthy countries. It makes sense to laud these developments, as long as we point out the truth that they are far from enough. Praising Copenhagen lowered the bar for what we can expect from the US position.

Even more relevant to continuing negotiations in Bonn, in hindsight the second reason that praising the Copenhagen Accord is problematic is the US doesn’t really agree with it. Almost as soon as the negotiators were back in Washington, they were contradicting what they signed. The Accord called for significant climate finance to be housed in and distributed by the UNFCCC, which the administration argues now should be managed elsewhere. Even it didn’t conflict with what the US signed in Copenhagen, this is a problematic change of position. There are few venues Parties could agree on for equitably assisting developing countries deal with climate change – the World Bank being one of the less transparent and less green alternatives promoted by the United States.

There is now agreement by all Parties in Bonn that a green climate fund will be established. The US says they like the World Bank as a home for climate funding because the bank has a proven track record of being able to manage large funding streams, and that the US is extremely worried about accountability. This argument really is ironic since the US also is not providing much money, and that the administration is admittedly using double counting in coming up with fast-start finance. Insufficient climate finance from the United States is the biggest obstacle to a global treaty, a problem that – unlike a commitment to emissions reductions – does need to be solved by Congress. So far, the administration has managed to scrounge up less than half a billion dollars.

Since the US negotiators constantly refer to the need for legislation, it does not bode well that the latest Kerry-Lieberman ‘climate’ legislation, the American Power Act, includes little to no long term international climate finance, and nothing for reducing deforestation. In comparison, Norway just signed a $1 billion agreement for a moratorium on deforestation in Indonesia. Certainly this bilateral agreement is another reason that progress is being made in Bonn on deforestation. Reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) is believed to be one area where all countries are very close to an agreement.

The Tokyo Two trial has just come to end in Japan today with the prosecutor asking the judge to sentence Junichi and Toru to 18 months in jail. This would be the longest jail term for any Greenpeace activist in the organisation’s forty-year history.

TAKE ACTION >> Demand justice for the Tokyo Two and the whales

Junichi sent this email out to all of our supporters for World Oceans Day.

 

 

Dear Friend,

I am happy to be able to send this message from Tokyo to you today and thank you for your support.

Greenpeace has been peacefully protesting for environmental protection for decades. What started in one man's front room in Vancouver, before I was even born, is now a global force for good.

You're helping to keep that history and tradition alive. But as my colleague Toru Suzuki and I know all too well, speaking up for our fragile earth can pose serious risks.

June 8th is World Oceans Day. We can celebrate the fact that we know so much more about our Blue Planet than ever before. We have sent submarines to the deepest canyons and sailed every part of the world, discovering new species and ecosystems - and how they are connected. We have seen how overfishing just one species can have devastating effects on an entire ecosystem and we understand the urgent need to protect our oceans. With your help we have been taking direct action and campaigning to save our seas.

In Japan we have been working to end whaling since our office opened 20 years ago. Japanese whaling is one of the most extreme examples of the needless waste of ocean life. Two years ago along with my colleague Toru, we took action to turn the tide on whaling here at home in Japan. And for the last two years we have paid the price for that peaceful protest. We were arrested and held without charge for 23 days - tied to chairs while we were interrogated, without our lawyers present. We have been charged with theft and trespass for taking action to secure the evidence of organized theft and embezzlement at the highest levels.

I know what I did was right. Our prosecution is political and our human rights have been abused. Despite that, and despite countless protests worldwide, Toru and I may still go to jail, for up to ten years.

We're in court again on World Oceans Day - for the final part of our trial. So, I reach out to you, my fellow Rainbow Warrior, to make sure that your voice is heard loud and clear here in Tokyo. Please take action.

Top Image: A sketch of Junichi Sato, Tadano Yasushi (lawyer) and Toru Suzuki (left to right) in court. © Greenpeace/ Molly Intersimone

 

Today at high noon, Greenpeace, along with Public Citizen, Friends of the Earth, Energy Action Coalition, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, 350.org, Center for Biological Diversity and Hip Hop Caucus, articulated the outrage Americans everywhere are feeling by making a citizen’s arrest of BP CEO Tony Haward.

Today we mark the 46^th day of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, at this point the worst in American history. Millions of gallons of oil and toxic dispersants have entered the delicate ecosystem of the Gulf of Mexico. Meanwhile, BP CEO Tony Hayward recently complained that he wants his "life back." He has since recognized the selfishness behind his statement, but what have we, the concerned citizens, realized since this incident?

Rob Weissman, president of Public Citizen, center, speaks flanked by Rev. Lennox Yearwood, of Hip Hop Caucus, left, and Phil Radford of Greenpeace. View more images from the citizens arrest protest on our Flickr page.

What have we done to make sure that this doesn’t happen again?

Have we learned any lessons from this and other environmental catastrophes?

It appears as though our nation is becoming ‘used’ to oil spills. Ixtoc I in the 70’s, Exxon Valdez in the 80’s, Mega Borg in the 90’s, and now the Deepwater Horizon. All told, hundreds of millions of gallons of oil have terrorized our waterways and countless lives have been affected by these spills.

Why do we still permit this industry to thrive (Note: BP has legally escaped paying $172,508,633 in royalties to US taxpayers on leases it operates in the Gulf of Mexico, but has made $6 billion in profits over the first quarter of this year) despite the fact that the consequences of their actions remain clear? Isn’t one environmental disaster enough to stop the drills?

We stood in front of BP's DC offices and listed charges against the corporation, including worker safety and environmental violations, price-gouging, negligence, and the inability to adequately respond to the mounting catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico and surrounding communities. The charges culminated in a finding of criminal negligence and the presentation of a prison jumpsuit fitted for CEO Tony Hayward.

Hayward oversees a company that is responsible for causing the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history. BP has one of the worst records of environmental and worker safety violations of any oil company operating in the U.S. It has paid $730 million in fines and settlements for environmental and worker safety violations, was currently on probation for felony environmental violations, and has been found guilty of manipulating energy markets.

BP’s record is clear. Our response must be as well.

Eleven people are no longer alive because of BP’s negligent behavior. At least 491 birds, 227 turtles, and 27 mammals, including dolphins, have been found dead. The true extent of the environmental damage won’t be known for years. BP must be held accountable for its actions immediately.

Much of the press coverage of the BP Deepwater Horizon blowout and oil spill in the Gulf describes the disaster as "unprecedented" when, in fact, it is not. Thirty one years ago today — June 3, 1979 — Pemex's Ixtoc I exploratory well suffered a blowout resulting in the largest peace-time oil spill in history. Some 3.3 million barrels (138,600,000 gallons) of oil spewed into the Gulf of Mexico over a period of almost 11 months until the well was finally capped on March 23, 1980.

Greenpeace has been bearing witness to the BP Deepwater Disaster and oil spill for the past month. Click here to read more blogs, view videos and more images.

The Ixtoc exploratory well blowout occurred in 160 feet of water. Yet much is being made of the fact that the BP Deepwater Horizon blowout that killed 11 people and is still gushing oil into the Gulf occurred in 5,000 feet of water. Indeed, the Obama Administration is putting the brakes on new exploratory drilling in deep water, but is issuing permits for new drilling in shallow waters. This policy move misses some important points.  

First, the Minerals Management Service issued a report in 2007 that shows blowouts are relatively common. As this report shows, from 1992 to 2006, there were 5,671 wells drilled in the federal waters of the Outer Continental Shelf, and 39 blowouts occurred, or one blowout per every 387 wells drilled.  

Second, the report shows that 19 of the 39 blowouts in this period occurred in water depths of zero to 200 feet.  

Of course the depth of the Deepwater Horizon blowout makes any response challenging. But stopping the flow of oil in shallow waters may not be any less challenging, as the Ixtoc blowout shows. The Timor Sea blowout in 2009 occurred in 250 feet of water, and oil spilled for more than ten weeks until the fifth attempt to drill a relief well was successful.  

The bottom line is that if we continue to drill off our coasts blowouts will happen, failsafe technologies and redundancies will fail, and oil will spill into the ocean. As conventional oil supplies are exhausted and oil companies turn to ultra-deep drilling and drilling in Alaska’s arctic and other non-conventional areas, the dangers and threats posed by oil drilling will increase by orders of magnitude. The issue is not deep water oil drilling versus shallow water oil drilling. The issue is oil drilling, period.  

Without a full ban on all new exploratory drilling in US waters, blowouts, death and large oil spills still threaten America’s coastlines.

President Obama pledged last week that under his administration all oil drilling will be safe. Greenpeace challenges the notion of  “safe oil drilling” based on this fact: At every stage of the oil lifecycle — from exploration to production and transportation — spills and leaks are commonplace occurrences. Even if not a drop of oil spilled, the oil is eventually burned, which contributes to global warming. From cradle to grave, oil brings with it enormous health, safety and environmental consequences. There’s just no such thing as “safe oil drilling.”

Luckily, we can get off oil. Greenpeace will be releasing its Advanced Energy [R]evolution report next week, showing how the US can reduce its oil consumption 80 percent by 2050 without turning to coal or nuclear power, but by relying on conservation and renewable forms of energy.

Pemex’s Ixtoc, BP’s Deepwater Horizon, and the Montara blowout in the Timor Sea are just three in a long list of tragic oil disasters that could have been avoided if the world had weaned itself from oil. The 31st anniversary of the Ixtoc blowout — while oil is still spilling into the Gulf of Mexico from BP’s Deepwater Horizon — should be impetus enough to start an energy revolution here at home.

Whales needed help and you jumped into action to help save them. While the Obama Administration proposed a deal that would re-open commercial whaling for the first time in over two decades, activists, like you, spoke up for the whales by saying, “enough is enough!”

And, our collective voices are being heard! Today, I had the pleasure of delivering your messages to the White House. Your voice joined a million others in speaking on behalf of whales all around the world. Thank you.

Activists and supporters showed their love for whales by creating origami whales, participating in our photo contest, taking action online, tweeting and spreading the word on Facebook.

Commercial whaling is cruel and unacceptable. That’s why this proposed deal to re-open commercial whaling is so outrageous. In just a few weeks, the International Whaling Commission will gather in Morocco to vote on changes to the international ban on commercial whaling.

The Obama Administration will be at these negotiations knowing that millions of Americans back home are routing for the whales and not the whalers! Keep your fingers (and fins) crossed that whales will be spared from the path of deadly harpoons.

But we're not out of the clear yet! You can still take action and tell President Obama that you oppose commercial whaling. One voice can go a long way. 

 

August is roughly two months away. There are approximately sixty days until the first day of that month. Nine weeks.

And that is too far for me to grasp right now or plan for. It seems like forever.

August always signals the start of fall: the start of a new semester at school, the end of picnics and camping. But today is only June 3. It’s just starting to get hot.

However, this past Sunday, news broke that exacerbated this feeling, dramatically extending the time between now and then.  Officials warned that it could take until the end of summer to cap the oil spilling into the Gulf of Mexico. With this information, August seems like an entire lifetime away.

NOAA currently estimates that 210,000 gallons are spilling into the Gulf everyday, roughly twelve million more gallons will flow from the Deepwater Horizon, before it is stopped. But some say this is a conservative estimate, outside experts estimate upwards of 1 million gallons are spilling everyday, making it over 60 million gallons by the beginning of August.

The meaning and true impact of this statement is incomprehensible. It would be a severe understatement, perhaps even a belittlement, to say that the consequences of that much oil spilling into the Gulf will have widespread effects. 

 And while it is apparent that the spill has already taken a toll on ecosystems, fisherman, tourism and more, there are many other aspects along the coast that will be seriously threatened, should the oil continue to spill into the summer. 

One of these is the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary located approximately 100 miles off the coasts of Texas and Louisiana. Flower Garden is the only National Marine sanctuary in the Gulf of Mexico and only one of fourteen federally designated underwater areas protected by NOAA across the world. The place got its name because of its diverse array of brightly colored plants, coral, algae and animals.

The homepage of the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation has named the Flower Garden, the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and Gray’s Reef off the coast of Georgia as being threatened by the spill. 

The Flower Garden’s web site also made a statement last week that NOAA has an emergency response plan in case it the oil spill grows enough to affect the area.

A growing body of research shows the plan may need to be used.

Researchers have recently discovered multiple underwater plumes of oil that stretch for miles that will affect deep-sea life such as Sperm whales and ultimately the life on the floor of the oceans in the Gulf’s sanctuary. 

The New York Times said one plume is 10 miles long, 3 miles wide and 300 feet thick.

The University of South Florida reported another plume being 22 miles long, 6 miles wide and 1,000 feet deep.

Not surprisingly, in the wake of the multitude of research from a variety of qualified scientists, BP CEO Tony Hayward has been quoted as saying that there is “no evidence,” that the oil is below the surface.

But the depth of the oil is not the only thing that may threaten these protected areas.

Coral spawning in the Flower Gardens occurs in late summer. The event usually occurs each year for 7 to 10 days after the full moon during the month of August.

It is the same month that officials “hope” to cap the spill.

Another critical reason for this to be stopped is born.

NOAA was recently quoted in Science Daily stating that the timing of spawning is critical and that the oil spill could severely damage this natural process.

The administration said, “Corals that are spawning at the time of an oil spill can be damaged because the eggs and sperm, which are released into the water at very precise times, remain at shallow water depths for various times before they settle. Thus, in addition to compromising water quality, oil pollution can disrupt the long-term viability and reproductive success of corals, rendering them more vulnerable to other types of disturbances.”

The possibility of this occurring is about nine weeks away. Approximately 60 days.

It’s apparent that there have already been many visible effects of this event. However, not knowing when exactly it will end and slowly finding more and more that have and will be harmed in this event and its aftermath, unfolds everyday.

However, if we continue to participate in offshore drilling in any form, it may be only time before this happens again. Greenpeace believes that the only way to prevent an event like this and its consequences is to ban any and all new drilling.

Perhaps setting a deadline to stop the oil from pouring into the Gulf will help get the job done. The consequences of BP and all others involved not meeting it will affect life above and below the sea forever.

But maybe deadlines are just what are needed. No one will get a cash bonus this time for meeting a target date, but it’s clear that there is much more at stake.

 

 

Posted on behalf of Bessie Rose, GOT Spring 10 Alum:

 

 

I've just returned from the most life changing experience I've had yet in my 19 years on this beautiful Earth.  The experience I speak of is the Greenpeace Organizing Term. This semester, also called the GOT, provides students that have a passion for environmental activism, organizing, or are just curious about environmental issues in general an outlet to turn their concern into action. 

When I signed up for the GOT, I’ll admit, I wasn’t entirely sure what I was getting myself into. Once I had completed the interview, and then been accepted, I realized my vision – to act on something I cared deeply about – would become a reality.

The semester was filled with action (quite literally) on all ends. 

Some major highlights for me were the campaign simulation, the trainings, and the expedition trip. The campaign simulation gave each student two days to prepare, plan and implement a hypothetical environmental campaign on their campus or in their community using the tools we had gained while on the GOT.

It was hard but rewarding work, and after completion of the simulation, my confidence in my ability to run an environmental campaign increased ten-fold. 

Our expedition trip to Canada to bear witness to the tar sands was perhaps the most eye-opening experience for me while on the GOT. Before leaving for the trip we spent weeks studying the tar sands. 

We learned just how detrimental the tar sands are both to the land which contains large amounts of Canada’s wetlands and vast amounts of biodiversity, and also for the people including indigenous populations whose rights have been endlessly violated by oil companies. 

Once we got to Canada, we went on an exclusive tour through the tar sands. Along with the DC GOT class and Greenpeace Canada, we successfully planned and carried out an action in front of the BP headquarters in Calgary. 

Our action coincided with BP’s annual general meeting in London and other protests going on as part of the “BP Fortnight of Shame” to re-brand BP as an environmentally destructive company and demand that they divest from tar sands development.

The Calgary BP action was tons of fun to plan and carry out, but also required lots of hard-work, organization, and focus since it was almost entirely up to the GOT to plan and organize the event. Luckily, Greenpeace Canada was kind enough to give us space and materials to work, and also helped coordinate media to arrive at the event. 

It’s hard to encompass exactly what the Greenpeace Organizing Term did for me in a few paragraphs. I want to say that if you decide to join the GOT, I promise you won’t be disappointed. 

The GOT has and taught me how to align my beliefs with action that matters. For me, that’s the core of hope. And that, in itself, is a marvelous victory.

-Bessie Rose, Greenpeace Organizing Term Spring 2010 Alum

Even as BP's wellhead continues to spew its toxic brew, defacing miles of pristine coastline, Congress is apparently powerless to conjure a legislative fix for the threats to America's coasts. We need to learn a deep and profound lesson about what exactly our national priorities are.

Greenpeace has been bearing witness to the BP Deepwater Disaster and oil spill for the past month. Click here to read more blogs, view videos and more images.

The most recent “comprehensive climate legislation,” the Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act, is not the robust legislative protection for America’s coastlines that we so clearly need. Giveaways to the fossil fuels industries, nuclear subsidies, and junk emissions reduction targets are not the way to move forward.

While we still have no clear estimate of the total impact from the BP Oil Spill on the Gulf’s fragile ecology, fisheries, or tourism, we continue to wait for guidance from our elected officials. And though the picture may be bleak, at least one Senator has seen an opportunity to pivot from this disaster and help to end our disastrous dependence on dirty fossil fuels.

While the legislation does not call for a complete ban on drilling all of America’s coasts, we stand behind S.3433, the Clean Coasts and Efficient Cars Act of 2010, introduced by Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Congress should act to protect all of America’s coasts, including Alaska and the entire Gulf of Mexico. This legislation begins moving us toward that goal by protecting the coasts of the Atlantic, Pacific, Central Gulf, and Eastern Gulf of Mexico from a catastrophe like the BP Deepwater Disaster, which has already spilled millions of barrels of oil in the Gulf. Significantly, the bill recognizes an important step we can take to reduce demand for oil — raising fuel economy standards for gasoline powered vehicles.

Although we use 25% of all oil produced, the United States’ oil reserves represent only 3% of the global total. The result is that we already import about two-thirds of the oil we use. Because we simply do not have enough oil, offshore drilling cannot increase energy security - but more drilling can and will destroy ecosystems and coastal economies. A strategy to increase energy security for this generation and the future will only succeed if the focus is on developing renewable energy, increasing efficiency and reducing oil demand in our transportation sector. By increasing fuel economy, this legislation will reduce our demand for dirty oil, whether it is obtained from foreign countries or risky offshore drilling.

Sanders’ bill would set a fuel economy standard of 55 miles per gallon, up from an average of 35 mpg that American carmakers must achieve by 2030 under current law.

In Europe, by contrast, cars already get the equivalent of 42 mpg and by 2020 cars in Europe will be required to get at least 65 mpg. Why, in a rich and industrious country like America, can’t we also have the benefits (both environmental and price-wise) of such comprehensive legislation?

The time to act on climate change is now. We will let you know how you can support Sen. Sanders’ bill in the weeks to come. In the meantime, write to Congress and tell them to put a stop to dangerous and expensive offshore drilling off all our coasts.

By David Helvarg

Less than six months ago environmentalists were celebrating President Obama’s commitment to our public seas as they went to work in support of a proposed National Ocean Policy.  Of course that was before the President endorsed offshore oil drilling, nukes and “clean coal,” as a path to carbon-free energy.  That’s like proposing a healthy diet based on junk food, amphetamines and low-tar cigarettes.  You just can’t get there from here.

The President’s call for expanded fossil-fuel development on the nation’s outer continental shelf waters at the end of March came less than a month before the catastrophic explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oilrig in the Gulf.  That disaster, as we all now know, left 11 oil workers dead and 17 injured.  Then the rig burned for two days before sinking in almost mile deep water, setting off the worst and ongoing environmental disaster in U.S. history (and most compelling video since the jets hit the twin towers).

 

 

I’ve been on some of BP’s deepwater platforms in the Gulf and have written that this is where the next offshore disaster would likely take place.  The history of the industry’s claimed  “safer drilling technologies” has always come about – to the degree it has at all – in the wake of rapid exploration and extraction in new frontier waters, be they the drilling piers off Summerland California at the end of the 19th century (“the township is aslime with oil,” reported the San Jose Mercury News at the time) or mile deep Gulf waters today. 

These lessons keep getting learned in blood and oil in large measure because there was never any real government oversight from the Department of Interior’s Mineral Management Service that issues the offshore permits Created by Ronald Reagan’s notoriously anti-environmental Secretary of Interior James Watt in 1983, MMS has been - according to a two-year old Inspector General’s report on sex, drugs and paintball parties - the only government agency literally in bed with the industry it was supposed to regulate.  I once asked the chief of the environmental division of MMS why the agency has never cancelled an oil lease sale based on its own oil-spill risk assessments.  His response:  “It’s hard to make or break something as big as a lease on one issue.”

Right now, along with deep-ocean drilling in the Gulf another newer ‘frontier’ area is the Arctic Ocean that is becoming more accessible as a result of fossil-fuel fired climate change resulting in loss of sea ice.  Several Greenpeacers were recently arrested for writing a warning against drilling the Arctic Ocean on the side of a ship chartered by Shell Oil for exploratory drilling this summer.  Their chosen medium of expression - oil spilled from the BP hydrocarbon eruption.  Obviously, the wrong people were arrested.

Just retired Coast Guard Commandant Thad Allen, who has stayed on as the federal official in charge of the BP oil disaster response in the Gulf recently told me that the United States’ emerging 5th blue water coast in the Arctic lacks the Search and Rescue (SAR) assets, oil spill response capability, security and other resources including basic aids to navigation necessary for industrial and commercial activity to safely take place there.  Nonetheless the push to drill the Arctic continues even as the Gulf of Mexico is dying before us and 40 percent of America’s coastal wetlands are threatened with an oily apocalypse.  A reporter recently asked me if burning the wetlands or the waters was a better solution.  Is amputation better than gangrene?  Marginally perhaps, but the term ‘better’ doesn’t even apply at this point.

The better thing is to begin making a national and global commitment to a rapid transition from the extraction and burning of coal and oil, the cutting edge carbon technologies of the 16th and 19th centuries, to clean renewable energy for the 21st century and beyond.  After all no ecosystem, coastal culture or economy was every destroyed by a wind spill or a turning of the tide. 

David Helvarg is President of the Blue Frontier Campaign (www.bluefront.org), a marine conservation group that works with Greenpeace.  His book, ‘The U.S. Coast Guard – America’s Forgotten Heroes’ has just come out in paperback.  His new book is ‘Saved by the Sea – A Love Story with Fish.’  (both with St. Martin’s Press).

Next Tuesday June 8th marks a pivotal point in the trial of Junichi Sato and Toru Suzuki, two activists on trial for exposing an embezzlement scandal in the Japanese whaling program. Junichi and Toru, known as the Tokyo Two (T2), will give their closing arguments in what will be their final day in court before the judges retire to consider their verdict. It will be over two years since the two were arrested and subject to the drawn out judicial process, which has seen all three judges change – two of which were rotated only recently - and what appear to be ongoing cover-ups by the authorities.  The trial has become one which is not just about corruption within the whaling industry, but also human rights and freedom of expression in Japan, with the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention weighing in to say that the authorities’ treatment of the T2 has violated their human rights.  

Find the full UNWGAD opinion here

A recent CNN TV story describes the issue of whaling as a conflict between activists and the whalers. The T2 case shows a different battle happening within the country, one where those in authority deny their citizens the right to investigate, the right to informed discourse, rights that Japan is obligated to uphold based on their international agreements.  And soon, whaling also faces a pivotal moment with an upcoming International Whaling Commission meeting the Japanese delegation brings the same duplicity to the proceedings that the Tokyo government brings to the trial.

Artist sketch L-R: Junichi Sato, Defense Council Member, and Toru Suzuki. Greenpeace/Molly Intersimone

While the true nature of the whaling industry has been highlighted by the ongoing T2 case  the future of whaling will also come under scrutiny at the next IWC meeting.  Greenpeace wants a fair trial for its activists, and positive change at the IWC that will see the commission modernized into a body for the conservation and protection of whales, not whaling. Japan has an opportunity at the IWC and in the T2 case to prove that it is the first world democracy and environmental leader it wants to be.

Over 400,000 people around the world have signed on to support Junichi and Toru, and with next week’s closing arguments we will see if the court has been paying attention.  Please sign the petition for the T2 and tell the IWC delegation to save the whales.