Green Daily

The Army Corps of Engineers has frustrated me for a while. Why do we trust them to do a good job on major jobs that affect a lot of lives, when they're not really overseen by anybody and they have a huge personal financial interest in perpetuating giant engineering projects which may or may not be what's needed for the environment? And why do we keep calling Hurricane Katrina a "natural disaster," when it seems clear that the Corps' bad planning led to the breaks in the levees that ruined so many homes and killed so many people? Is it because we're just too afraid to challenge an organization which combines the two authoritative words "Army" and "engineer" in its name?

Well, the good times may be over for the Corps. The organization may now be held liable for damages to Katrina sufferers' homes, after a judge ruled that the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, a Corps-constructed shipping channel, contributed to the destruction in New Orleans in 2005. New Orleanians had been trying to get the channel shut down, because of the danger to the city during a storm surge, but the Corps refused, and instead built levees along the side - on soil that shifted, rendering some levees useless. It will be interesting to how the lawsuits go - how many people will choose to sue? How public will the suits be? And will the Corps maintain its mysterious aura of omnipotence after this is all over with?

Via Envirowonk

North Americans may talk the green talk, but we're apparently too lazy to walk the walk. The US and Canada came in first and second respectively in a survey which measured the environmental unfriendliness of consumers around the world. The study, conducted for the National Geographic Society, asked people in 14 countries about their lifestyles, including questions on housing, food, and transport, and then gave them a green score on a scale of one to a hundred.

Reasons for the low marks in North America had to do with things like large houses, a preference for driving over public transit, and (not surprisingly in Canada) considerable use of home heating. Developing countries showed a smaller environmental footprint, probably because poverty, which usually involves tiny houses and nonexistent cars, is far less energy-intensive than wealth.

Beside the US and Canada, countries measured in the survey were Brazil, India, China, Mexico, Hungary, Russia, Great Britain, Germany, Australia, Spain, Japan and France.

via [CBC News]

As the debate about biofuels rages on, German ministers are sticking to their guns when it comes to renewable energy targets. Despite pressure from the UN to cut back on crop fuels, Germany's environmental minister Sigmar Gabriel says that Germany should go ahead with its plans to use 10% biofuels by 2020.

According to Gabriel, the spike in food prices is coming from a variety of sources like poor harvests, increased global demand, and huge growth in commodities investment. The real culprit in the global food crunch isn't the growing market for biofuels, he says. Instead, it's speculators that have driven commodity prices to astronomical levels, breaking down the normal relationship between supply and demand. Of course, the same can be said about the price of oil.

Last week, the International Center for Technology Assessment and a coalition of environmental and public health groups, including the the Center for Food Safety, Greenpeace, and Consumers Union, filed a citizen petition asking that the EPA regulate nanosilver as a pesticide under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act .

Nanosilver has been added to a host of consumer products -- everything from sheets to bus handrails to children's toys -- for its antimicrobial properties.

I want to acknowledge something controversial about myself. I let my cats outside.

They are fairly unique creatures. They stick around my house, going a block away at most. They come when called, stay out for only an hour at a time. But they are cats. While one never kills a thing, and rarely tries, the other has given up synthetic feathers attached to polls in favor of the real thing: birds.

He also happens to like chipmunks, mice and the occasional baby bunny. I am constantly saving shocked creatures from the jaws of my cat.

The killing has ceased since I added bells to their collars, two in fact. And generally they aren't allowed outside during the early morning or dusk when birds are most active. But I know I'm contributing to a problem. I know that while I may slow for all crows and red winged blackbirds nearing my vehicle, my cats do not.

The House and Senate are just about finished with conference negotiations over the reauthorization of the farm bill (HR 2419). The farm bill is sprawling, $570 billion piece of legislation, containing provisions on everything from Food Stamps and WIC to crop subsidies to biofuels to drought and flood aid.
This year's reauthorization looked all but dead as conferees from the House and Senate fought over protectionist subsidies and tariffs, the competing demands of a tight budget v. the need to increase food aid, conservation measures, and more.

But, after months of intense negotiations between House Agriculture Committee Chair Collin Peterson, Sens. Tom Harkin, Pat Roberts, and Kent Conrad, is the farm bill dead on arrival?

The Food and Drug Administration is going to be hiring more than 1,300 biologists, chemists, medical officers and others over the next few months.

This announcement comes in the midst of accusations by both consumer advocates and lawmakers that the agency is suffering from lax oversight, demonstrated by events like pets dying from tainted pet food and people dying from fake Heparin.

The FDA already employs 10,000 people and it plans to bring on these 1,300 by October.

The downside is, only 600 of the 1,300 positions are new, the rest are just to fill current positions. Four hundred of the new positions will focus on drug review. Only 150 of the new positions will be tasked with inspecting drugs, foods and other items.

If you're interested, find a FDA career fair near you.

A silent tsunami which knows no borders sweeping the world.

That is how Josette Sheeran, head of the UN World Food Program, described the worsening global food crisis. Food shortages have caused riots in Haiti, Cameroon, Indonesia and Egypt, among others.

The sharp increases in food prices are attributed to several factors, including (1) an increased demand for biofuels (corn being made into ethanol rather than sold on the food market), (2) drought (e.g., in Australia) or flooding (Bolivia, South Asia, some parts of E. Africa), (3) surging demand from developing nations like China and India, (4) shortages of fertilizer, and (5) property rights.

So what's being done to ease the burden on the world's poor?

In recent months, many of California's vigilant environmentalists have been pointing out that -- when it comes to the environment -- the Govenator talks the talk, but he doesn't necessarily walk the walk. In fact, he doesn't walk much at all, he prefers to take his private jet. Not exactly the most carbon-conscious decision.

Here's the controversy: the Schwarzeneggers live in posh neighborhood in Brentwood, and Arnold works each day in Sacramento -- 380 miles away. Usually flies his Gulfstream IV from his mansion to work, but a new ban might close the town's small airport to all jets. The 300 runway was designed for propeller-driven planes and many are concerned about the potential for a disastrous overrun by a jet into the nearby houses. A federal judge will rule on whether to ban the jets. So far, Arnold doesn't seem moved by the criticism of his carbon spewing commute.

You'd think that at a meeting held by a group called the Pacific Asia Travel Association, most of the delegates would be from, you know, Asia. However, AFP reports that at a recent conference held by PATA to discuss greening up the travel business, Asian airlines and tourism companies were woefully underrepresented.

Officials from PATA, who declined to be named, said they had invited more Asian companies, but faced overwhelming disinterest. The impression that they had was that many Asian businesses don't have climate change or other environmental issues on their radar screen yet.

Air travel is thought to account for between 2 and 4 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

The article speculates that Asian airlines and other travel businesses will probably become more eco-conscious as they come under pressure from overseas partners, and also as they become influenced by the next generation of kids who've learned about climate change in school. And if that doesn't do the trick, the increasing frequency of massive typhoons, floods, and sandstorms in various places around the continent might attract their attention.

For all the obvious ecological downsides of nuclear power - catastrophic meltdowns, waste that will be toxifying our water table until the sun explodes, giant mutant swamp monsters etc. - it's always had at least one thing going for it. Unlike coal, gas, or oil power stations, nuclear plants don't produce planet-warming greenhouse gases.

Now a new study published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology says nukes may lose even that advantage. A group of Australian researchers have calculated that the greenhouse gases emitted from the nuclear power process will rise substantially in the future.

Nuclear power, of course, requires uranium as fuel. As high-grade uranium gets scarcer, locating and mining it will become more energy intensive, with companies digging deeper to find the metal, refining more ore in order to produce it, and producing more pollution in the process.

As with gas and oil, we'll also eventually run out of uranium, although estimates of when that will happen vary widely. Really, who thought this was a good idea in the first place?

Now that our food crisis is more or less official, scientists are strongly urging that we take the emphasis off of biofuel production, because decreasing our use of products like ethanol would cut corn prices by 20 percent.

So, of course, it is only fitting that our fearless leader is finally coming around to tell us that he is in favor of biofuels, and that we shouldn't back down, even in the face of, uh, food shortages and severe poverty.

Bush was quoted as saying, "The truth of the matter is, it's in our national interest that our farmers grow energy, as opposed to us purchasing energy from parts of the world that are unstable or may not like us."

Riiight. So...that whole dependence on foreign oil/getting buddy-buddy with Saudi Arabia...we're over that now? And gawd forbid we upset the farm lobby.

When you and I holler about global warming, it may not mean much, but when a group of folks whose name is immortalized in the song "Puttin' on the Ritz" start complaining, people sit up and take notice.

A group of descendants of John D. Rockefeller, founder of ExxonMobil predecessor Standard Oil, are calling for a shake-up in management at the oil giant, saying that the company is "failing to address the future of energy". The family are apparently concerned about Exxon's late and reluctant conversion to climate change belief, and subsequent failure to do much about the issue.

The group is looking to have the jobs of Chairman and CEO, currently both held by Rex Tillerson, to be split into two separate roles. It's not known exactly how much Exxon stock the family actually owns, so it's unclear whether their request will have any impact.

So, it appears that Sen. McCain isn't alone in his need for an Econ 101 refresher.

Today, presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized Barack Obama for not supporting the plan to suspend federal taxes on gasoline and diesel from Memorial Day through Labor Day. "I understand the American people need some relief," said Sen. Clinton.

There's no denying that the Americans are cash-strapped. As oil prices climbed toward $120 a barrel, food costs continue to skyrocket, and access to credit tightens, suspending the gasoline tax would almost certainly provide some small measure of short-term relief. But suspending the tax, in the long-term is a terrible idea.

China's state electricity regulatory agency has said that most coal-fired power plants around China have only 12 days worth of coal supply, and some are down to less than a week. The shortage comes in spite of the fact that coal production is up 15% from the same period last year.

China's booming economy relies on coal-fired plants for about 80% of its electricity, so a potential shortfall - especially in the run-up to the Beijing Olympics this summer - could be disastrous, resulting in blackouts, brownouts and serious economic damage.

Coal power in general is anethema to environmentalists because it's incredibly dirty, and not in a good way. However, with the US in recession. and the world suffering energy and food prices shocks on a scale not seen for decades, an unanticipated slowdown in the world's second largest economy could wreak new havoc around the globe.

WIth any luck, the ongoing energy crisis will push the Chinese government into a more serious investment in renewable energy sources. However, in the short term, authorities have made it clear that economic growth, however powered, will take precedence over fighting CO2 emissions.