http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/us/keystone-xl-pipeline-nebraska-opponents.html

We talked about the pipeline in class today so I thought I’d do a little research on it!

The Keystone Pipeline was proposed six years ago by the energy company TransCanada. It is supposed to transport crude oil 1,179 miles from Alberta, Canada to southern Nebraska. The pipeline, although partially built has been received with mixed feelings and a ton of protest. Unlike other environmental issues, it is not just the environmental extremists who are against the pipeline. Native Americans, farmers, city dwellers, elderly and even some conservatives are opposed to the continuation of the pipeline.

Arguments against the pipeline include concerns that any type of spill would irreparably harm the Ogallala Aquifer, the source of water used to irrigate cropland and supply taps across a wide portion of the heartland. In response, one might say that they are taking extra care to prevent spillage. Regardless of the ignorance of that statement because spills are always possible, the pipeline should not be built solely on the fact that is supports the extraction of tar sands and increases our dependence on fossil fuel. The oil extracted from tar sands is not clean oil. It is dirty, grainy oil and it requires a lot more energy and water to make it usable than we get from it’s use. The process of extraction is not good for the environment and it creates very ugly eye sores in the surrounding area.

The article linked talks about a protest that happened saturday in Neligh, Nebraska. A patch of farmland became a concert with Willie Nelson and Neil Young to protest the Keystone Pipeline. 8,000 people attended the protest and many spoke emotionally and at length about their opposition to the pipeline and the problems they fear it portends.

NYT video

NYT, “Navajo Leader Drops His Support for Slaughter of Wild Horses on the Reservation”

NYT, “On Fate of Wild Horses, Stars and Indians Spar”

NYT, “The Wild Horses’ Troubled Rescue”

NYT, “Report Criticizes U.S. Stewardship of Wild Horses”

AgriPulse, “USDA grants permit to allow for horse slaughter facility”

This is a video about the people in Ecuador who are fighting against the drilling of oil in the Amazon.  An Ecuadorian girl talks about how allowing drilling is wrong.  She says how the people are being a “pain in the ass” for the government.  The government say that allowing drilling will solve poverty, but the Ecuadorian girl says it will not solve poverty, and it will destroy culture and kill animals.  Her grandfather used to say “it is from the amazon that the breath of the world comes from.”  If the amazon is destroyed then the world is in trouble.  It is a great video that has a lot of video footage of the destruction going on in the beautiful Amazon. There is also video of the people protesting against the drilling and they are asking for support from the rest of the world.

http://amazonwatch.org/take-action/keep-the-oil-in-the-ground-in-the-amazon

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/09/campaign_over_bottle_bill_expa.html

The Bottle Bill? yes, you read that correctly. There is an on going initiative in the state of Massachusetts to expand the bottle tax to larger bottles that would have an impact not only consumers, but grocery stores would also have to raise their prices. We are really just talking about a nickel. And a nickel is to most of us is nothing.

This demand curve goes back to the basic supply and demand curve anyone would learn in Economics 101. You can tax either the consumer or the producer, either way the effect on the market is exactly the same.

This article highlights mostly on the party that is opposed to increasing the bottle tax. Most of their support is in the form of donations for campaign ads to be aired in Massachusetts. Those that have donated include the American Beverage Association donated $5 million, Stop and Shop gave another $300,000 and the Springfield-based Big Y Foods gave $90,000.

I found it interesting to see that The Massachusetts Sierra Club, an environmental group, is the main funder of supporting the bottle bill expansion. I thought that the Sierra Club made an effort to stay out of Political issues?

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-29321143

Wait a second, did I read this article correctly? Norway is going to pay Liberia to be more environmentally aware?

Norway will pay Liberia $150 million to stop its illegal logging. The deal, which was unveiled at the UN climate summit, is the first ever country-level agreement and works like so: Liberia will put 30% of its forests under protected area status by 2020 and will pay communities directly affected; Norway will pay so long as the protection is verified.

Firstly, this agreement interested me since it addresses many arenas: the economy, environmental justice, biodiversity, and global health. In terms of health, researchers have seen correlations in deforestation and contact with Ebola virus in reservoirs. Biodiversity? Liberia has 43% of the Upper Guinean forest and is a diversity hotspot with many rare species. The economy would also be improved, since it gives money to stop the extreme logging that was endorsed by the president in 2012 (President Sirleaf gave licenses to companies that would account for 58% of the rainforest left in Liberia). Plus, the poverty-stricken communities around the rainforest will be paid too.

Second, the article made me consider Norway’s and Liberia’s roles in this exchange. As a wealthier country, should we be held accountable to make agreements like this? And why has Norway specifically been a leader in this sort of global behavior? Maybe it would be beneficial to look at the sociocultural components that made this deal a reality so that it could be applied by other first world countries.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2014/09/17/349223674/tiny-spanish-island-nears-its-goal-100-percent-renewable-energy

The Spanish island of El Hierro is running off of 100% renewable energy (wind and hydro-power), making it the first energy self-sufficient island that hasn’t been hooked up to a power grid (Denmark’s island, Samso, is energy-independent but hooked up).

This article makes me optimistic about sustainability. At the fracking forum, a lot of Lafayette students mentioned how with sustainable energy we would not (and could not) reach our energy demand… but on this island, the lights never even flicker. (Also, in my opinion, maybe we should be reconsidering our demand anyway…) Regardless, El Hierro is set up so that whenever the wind dies down and the turbines stop spinning, the hydro plants start up five seconds later to start pumping water uphill so that it will start generating hydro-power.

What interested me was that these two elements were already technology that we had. They were just never paired together. Who knew we could just spin something a bit to make it so much more effective? It makes me happy to see people thinking about creative ways to achieve energy independence for the future, and gives me hope for the rest of the world.

Now you’ve all gotten me interested in gerrymandering, so I am going to do a little reading on the subject over the weekend.  If you are interested too, here are some links to check out:

Washington Post, “How redistricting could keep the House red for a decade”  **look at the map of PA in this article

New York Times, “The Great Gerrymander of 2012”

Washington Post, “Florida judge takes on gerrymandering; sets stage for Supreme Court cases in the fall”

and, of course, wikipedia, which gives a good rundown on the effects of gerrymandering

and if you are really ambitious or have absolutely nothing else to do, here is a law article on the legal history of partisan gerrymandering

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/23/un-climate-change-summit-partial-results-speeches-obama

Previously I posted an article regarding the events leading up to the climate summit which happened on September 23rd. It was the first meeting about climate in five years but aside from a lot of talk and agreement that climate change is a problem, the summit did not accomplish a lot. In Obama’s speech, he mentioned the 300,000 people who participated in the climate march saying  “our citizens keep marching, we cannot pretend we do not hear them.” But most leaders, including Obama, held back on making any sort of commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions or give significant climate finance to developing countries.

The president of France said it best, “we can’t just limit ourselves to words, expressions of regret, and exercises in stock taking.”

Overall the climate summit had an energy behind it as all other discussions and meetings revolving around climate do. Climate change is a problem, and we know what we need to do to fix it but the solution is so drastic that no one will actually fully commit to it.

In response to our discussion of the climate march on tuesday, here are a couple articles to check out:

David Roberts at Grist on “Why the (awesome) climate march won’t change American politics”

Huffington Post on  “TV News Misses Yet Another Opportunity to Cover Climate Change”

You can see pictures of the Wall Street climate protest on monday on Rainforest Action Network’s website.

Also, because I can’t resist, check out this daily show clip that covers the march and Stewart’s commentary on a hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology:

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/8q3nmm/burn-noticed

Going off the in-class topic of the Climate Change March, the article I read made note that Obama agreed with the protest and has restated that his goal for the near term is to cut carbon pollution 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. He then went on to talk about how we need more collective action and innovation to deal with the issue of climate change. I completely agree with everything he is quoted saying in this article, yet am perplexed to know why he still somewhat supports and the government defends fracking. If they truly had the environment and the well-being of future generations, I think the goal of 17%, could be higher. 

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/09/23/presidential-visit-un-restrictions-and-climate-protest-could-lead-to-gridlock/