By Mark Brownstein

New York is now the latest in a growing number of states cracking down on methane – the powerful greenhouse gas responsible for about a quarter of global warming.

The effort comes on the heels of a successful senate vote to uphold methane limits for oil and gas companies operating on our nation’s public and tribal lands, and sends yet another strong message to the oil and gas industry that Americans want and expect commonsense standards that  protect our health and natural resources.

Governor Cuomo’s new plan takes a comprehensive approach to tackling methane from the state’s biggest emission sources: landfills, agriculture, and the oil and gas industry. Collectively, the twenty-five reduction strategies outlined will allow New York to significantly curb methane pollution and allow the state to deliver on its 2030 climate target.

One of the biggest opportunities for methane reductions is in the oil and gas sector, where companies can eliminate nearly half of current emissions at minimal cost.

This is a strong move by Governor Cuomo at the exact right time.

The Trump administration has initiated a series of efforts in recent months to dismantle our nation’s clean air safeguards, including those that address oil and gas methane emissions.

Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency issued a stay on protections that would have reduced methane from new oil and gas facilities. And before that the agency announced it would no longer collect data about emissions from existing facilities.

But Trump’s home state is signaling a refusal to be deterred.

Cuomo’s plan will reinstate EPA standards for New York’s oil and gas facilities and calls for additional measures to reduce systematic methane leaks from pipelines, storage facilities and old, abandoned wells.

As one of the nation’s top five consumers of gas, New York has a special responsibility to ensure it is transported and distributed responsibly. By implementing measures to reducing emissions from natural gas gathering lines, transmission facilities and gas utility pipelines, New York is stepping up to the task.

Reducing methane from the oil and gas sector – whether it’s the well head or city pipelines – is one of the most cost-effective ways to take on one of the worst climate offenders and shore up our nation’s energy security.  Standards that require oil and gas companies to take methane out of the atmosphere and deliver more energy to our communities are the exact kind of protections that the majority of American’s support.  Continued state leadership – like this latest effort in New York – is critical to assuring Americans across the country that those safeguards will be in place.

By Mark Brownstein

New York is now the latest in a growing number of states cracking down on methane – the powerful greenhouse gas responsible for about a quarter of global warming.

The effort comes on the heels of a successful senate vote to uphold methane limits for oil and gas companies operating on our nation’s public and tribal lands, and sends yet another strong message to the oil and gas industry that Americans want and expect commonsense standards that  protect our health and natural resources.

Governor Cuomo’s new plan takes a comprehensive approach to tackling methane from the state’s biggest emission sources: landfills, agriculture, and the oil and gas industry. Collectively, the twenty-five reduction strategies outlined will allow New York to significantly curb methane pollution and allow the state to deliver on its 2030 climate target.

One of the biggest opportunities for methane reductions is in the oil and gas sector, where companies can eliminate nearly half of current emissions at minimal cost.

This is a strong move by Governor Cuomo at the exact right time.

The Trump administration has initiated a series of efforts in recent months to dismantle our nation’s clean air safeguards, including those that address oil and gas methane emissions.

Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency issued a stay on protections that would have reduced methane from new oil and gas facilities. And before that the agency announced it would no longer collect data about emissions from existing facilities.

But Trump’s home state is signaling a refusal to be deterred.

Cuomo’s plan will reinstate EPA standards for New York’s oil and gas facilities and calls for additional measures to reduce systematic methane leaks from pipelines, storage facilities and old, abandoned wells.

As one of the nation’s top five consumers of gas, New York has a special responsibility to ensure it is transported and distributed responsibly. By implementing measures to reducing emissions from natural gas gathering lines, transmission facilities and gas utility pipelines, New York is stepping up to the task.

Reducing methane from the oil and gas sector – whether it’s the well head or city pipelines – is one of the most cost-effective ways to take on one of the worst climate offenders and shore up our nation’s energy security.  Standards that require oil and gas companies to take methane out of the atmosphere and deliver more energy to our communities are the exact kind of protections that the majority of American’s support.  Continued state leadership – like this latest effort in New York – is critical to assuring Americans across the country that those safeguards will be in place.

By Ben Ratner

 This post originally appeared on Forbes. 

Last week, the oil and gas lobby suffered a major and unexpected loss, when the Republican controlled Congress refused to eliminate the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) natural gas waste rule. While API has since requested a two-year stay in compliance, they should instead pause, learn the lessons presented by the CRA, and move forward according to the wishes of the American public.

Here are three lessons industry should learn.

1. They misread the mood of the American public

In the early days of the Trump Administration, its anti-climate, anti-environment agenda came into sharp focus. This looked like a golden opportunity to roll back environmental safeguards, including the BLM protections, which minimize the unnecessary flaring, venting, and leaking of natural gas on federal and tribal lands. With President Trump still in the early days of his victory, and single party control of both Houses of Congress, some saw a political opening, or even a voter mandate to weaken environmental protections.

But what they saw was a mirage: Absolutely no one voted for more pollution.

The oil and gas industry misread the mood of the American public when it comes to public health, environment, and waste of our nation's valuable energy resources.

American voters from all over the country expressed their deep opposition to this rollback. National polling showed over 70% of voters wanted to keep the BLM rule. From ranchers to institutional investors, and tribal leaders to a broad swath of environmental and health activists, Americans stood up and spoke out.

Industry and Congress expected to win easily, but they didn’t have their finger on the pulse of a country whose citizens refuse to choose between energy they can reasonably afford and air they can safely breathe; economic opportunity they can believe in, and a climate that will be hospitable in the years to come.

2. They need to think about rules as investments

Industry tends to either view rules as a cost or as an investment. Unfortunately, those that saw the BLM rule as a cost had the loudest voices within industry, and that paved the way for overreach.

It’s time for industry to listen to its leaders who fall in the second camp. Yes, rules are not costless. Yes, companies will need to expend modest resources on implementing best practices, reporting, and other compliance activities.

But those are investments. Investments in responsible operations. Investments in the communities where they work. Investment in building trust with civil society, regulators, and long-term investors getting increasingly nervous about the hissing leak methane punctures in the value proposition of natural gas in a lower carbon future.

The irony is that the biggest cost to industry’s standing and license to operate – not to mention efficiency in conserving natural resources – would come in not making those investments.

As industry lobbies EPA to review its own methane rule, they should take stock of lessons learned from the BLM experience.

3. There is a plus side.

It’s also time to see what opportunities the BLM rule offers.

First, the BLM rule takes aim at routine flaring – which is not just an eyesore, but represents a loss of natural gas and a waste of taxpayer dollars. Operators should now make the investments and operational changes needed to end this wasteful practice.

Second, the BLM rule requires semi-annual leak detection and repair practices at well pads, and quarterly inspections at compressor stations. As these requirements (and similar ones from EPA and in several states) remain in force, industry has every incentive to support innovation in technologies and practices to detect leaks even more quickly and efficiently than ever before.

A growing industry is ready to step up to this challenge: Start-ups like Quanta3, made-in-America businesses like Sensit, and even large firms like IBM are here to learn about operator needs, to demonstrate their technologies and approaches, and to build a factual record that can support regulatory approval as an alternative. These win-win opportunities are good for the environment and for business, but they won’t be seized without industry leadership.

The BLM and EPA rules are both opportunities for industry, not just costs. Industry should take note, and move forward heeding the wishes of the majority of Americans.

Image source: Tim Evanson, Flickr

 This post originally appeared on Forbes.  Last week, the oil and gas lobby suffered a major and unexpected loss, when the Republican controlled Congress refused to eliminate the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) natural gas waste rule. While API has since requested a two-year stay in compliance, they should instead pause, learn the lessons presented by […]

By Ben Ratner

 This post originally appeared on Forbes. 

Last week, the oil and gas lobby suffered a major and unexpected loss, when the Republican controlled Congress refused to eliminate the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) natural gas waste rule. While API has since requested a two-year stay in compliance, they should instead pause, learn the lessons presented by the CRA, and move forward according to the wishes of the American public.

Here are three lessons industry should learn.

1. They misread the mood of the American public

In the early days of the Trump Administration, its anti-climate, anti-environment agenda came into sharp focus. This looked like a golden opportunity to roll back environmental safeguards, including the BLM protections, which minimize the unnecessary flaring, venting, and leaking of natural gas on federal and tribal lands. With President Trump still in the early days of his victory, and single party control of both Houses of Congress, some saw a political opening, or even a voter mandate to weaken environmental protections.

But what they saw was a mirage: Absolutely no one voted for more pollution.

The oil and gas industry misread the mood of the American public when it comes to public health, environment, and waste of our nation's valuable energy resources.

American voters from all over the country expressed their deep opposition to this rollback. National polling showed over 70% of voters wanted to keep the BLM rule. From ranchers to institutional investors, and tribal leaders to a broad swath of environmental and health activists, Americans stood up and spoke out.

Industry and Congress expected to win easily, but they didn’t have their finger on the pulse of a country whose citizens refuse to choose between energy they can reasonably afford and air they can safely breathe; economic opportunity they can believe in, and a climate that will be hospitable in the years to come.

2. They need to think about rules as investments

Industry tends to either view rules as a cost or as an investment. Unfortunately, those that saw the BLM rule as a cost had the loudest voices within industry, and that paved the way for overreach.

It’s time for industry to listen to its leaders who fall in the second camp. Yes, rules are not costless. Yes, companies will need to expend modest resources on implementing best practices, reporting, and other compliance activities.

But those are investments. Investments in responsible operations. Investments in the communities where they work. Investment in building trust with civil society, regulators, and long-term investors getting increasingly nervous about the hissing leak methane punctures in the value proposition of natural gas in a lower carbon future.

The irony is that the biggest cost to industry’s standing and license to operate – not to mention efficiency in conserving natural resources – would come in not making those investments.

As industry lobbies EPA to review its own methane rule, they should take stock of lessons learned from the BLM experience.

3. There is a plus side.

It’s also time to see what opportunities the BLM rule offers.

First, the BLM rule takes aim at routine flaring – which is not just an eyesore, but represents a loss of natural gas and a waste of taxpayer dollars. Operators should now make the investments and operational changes needed to end this wasteful practice.

Second, the BLM rule requires semi-annual leak detection and repair practices at well pads, and quarterly inspections at compressor stations. As these requirements (and similar ones from EPA and in several states) remain in force, industry has every incentive to support innovation in technologies and practices to detect leaks even more quickly and efficiently than ever before.

A growing industry is ready to step up to this challenge: Start-ups like Quanta3, made-in-America businesses like Sensit, and even large firms like IBM are here to learn about operator needs, to demonstrate their technologies and approaches, and to build a factual record that can support regulatory approval as an alternative. These win-win opportunities are good for the environment and for business, but they won’t be seized without industry leadership.

The BLM and EPA rules are both opportunities for industry, not just costs. Industry should take note, and move forward heeding the wishes of the majority of Americans.

Image source: Tim Evanson, Flickr

By Ben Ratner

 This post originally appeared on Forbes. 

Last week, the oil and gas lobby suffered a major and unexpected loss, when the Republican controlled Congress refused to eliminate the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) natural gas waste rule. While API has since requested a two-year stay in compliance, they should instead pause, learn the lessons presented by the CRA, and move forward according to the wishes of the American public.

Here are three lessons industry should learn.

1. They misread the mood of the American public

In the early days of the Trump Administration, its anti-climate, anti-environment agenda came into sharp focus. This looked like a golden opportunity to roll back environmental safeguards, including the BLM protections, which minimize the unnecessary flaring, venting, and leaking of natural gas on federal and tribal lands. With President Trump still in the early days of his victory, and single party control of both Houses of Congress, some saw a political opening, or even a voter mandate to weaken environmental protections.

But what they saw was a mirage: Absolutely no one voted for more pollution.

The oil and gas industry misread the mood of the American public when it comes to public health, environment, and waste of our nation's valuable energy resources.

American voters from all over the country expressed their deep opposition to this rollback. National polling showed over 70% of voters wanted to keep the BLM rule. From ranchers to institutional investors, and tribal leaders to a broad swath of environmental and health activists, Americans stood up and spoke out.

Industry and Congress expected to win easily, but they didn’t have their finger on the pulse of a country whose citizens refuse to choose between energy they can reasonably afford and air they can safely breathe; economic opportunity they can believe in, and a climate that will be hospitable in the years to come.

2. They need to think about rules as investments

Industry tends to either view rules as a cost or as an investment. Unfortunately, those that saw the BLM rule as a cost had the loudest voices within industry, and that paved the way for overreach.

It’s time for industry to listen to its leaders who fall in the second camp. Yes, rules are not costless. Yes, companies will need to expend modest resources on implementing best practices, reporting, and other compliance activities.

But those are investments. Investments in responsible operations. Investments in the communities where they work. Investment in building trust with civil society, regulators, and long-term investors getting increasingly nervous about the hissing leak methane punctures in the value proposition of natural gas in a lower carbon future.

The irony is that the biggest cost to industry’s standing and license to operate – not to mention efficiency in conserving natural resources – would come in not making those investments.

As industry lobbies EPA to review its own methane rule, they should take stock of lessons learned from the BLM experience.

3. There is a plus side.

It’s also time to see what opportunities the BLM rule offers.

First, the BLM rule takes aim at routine flaring – which is not just an eyesore, but represents a loss of natural gas and a waste of taxpayer dollars. Operators should now make the investments and operational changes needed to end this wasteful practice.

Second, the BLM rule requires semi-annual leak detection and repair practices at well pads, and quarterly inspections at compressor stations. As these requirements (and similar ones from EPA and in several states) remain in force, industry has every incentive to support innovation in technologies and practices to detect leaks even more quickly and efficiently than ever before.

A growing industry is ready to step up to this challenge: Start-ups like Quanta3, made-in-America businesses like Sensit, and even large firms like IBM are here to learn about operator needs, to demonstrate their technologies and approaches, and to build a factual record that can support regulatory approval as an alternative. These win-win opportunities are good for the environment and for business, but they won’t be seized without industry leadership.

The BLM and EPA rules are both opportunities for industry, not just costs. Industry should take note, and move forward heeding the wishes of the majority of Americans.

Image source: Tim Evanson, Flickr

By Ben Ratner

 This post originally appeared on Forbes. 

Last week, the oil and gas lobby suffered a major and unexpected loss, when the Republican controlled Congress refused to eliminate the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) natural gas waste rule. While API has since requested a two-year stay in compliance, they should instead pause, learn the lessons presented by the CRA, and move forward according to the wishes of the American public.

Here are three lessons industry should learn.

1. They misread the mood of the American public

In the early days of the Trump Administration, its anti-climate, anti-environment agenda came into sharp focus. This looked like a golden opportunity to roll back environmental safeguards, including the BLM protections, which minimize the unnecessary flaring, venting, and leaking of natural gas on federal and tribal lands. With President Trump still in the early days of his victory, and single party control of both Houses of Congress, some saw a political opening, or even a voter mandate to weaken environmental protections.

But what they saw was a mirage: Absolutely no one voted for more pollution.

The oil and gas industry misread the mood of the American public when it comes to public health, environment, and waste of our nation's valuable energy resources.

American voters from all over the country expressed their deep opposition to this rollback. National polling showed over 70% of voters wanted to keep the BLM rule. From ranchers to institutional investors, and tribal leaders to a broad swath of environmental and health activists, Americans stood up and spoke out.

Industry and Congress expected to win easily, but they didn’t have their finger on the pulse of a country whose citizens refuse to choose between energy they can reasonably afford and air they can safely breathe; economic opportunity they can believe in, and a climate that will be hospitable in the years to come.

2. They need to think about rules as investments

Industry tends to either view rules as a cost or as an investment. Unfortunately, those that saw the BLM rule as a cost had the loudest voices within industry, and that paved the way for overreach.

It’s time for industry to listen to its leaders who fall in the second camp. Yes, rules are not costless. Yes, companies will need to expend modest resources on implementing best practices, reporting, and other compliance activities.

But those are investments. Investments in responsible operations. Investments in the communities where they work. Investment in building trust with civil society, regulators, and long-term investors getting increasingly nervous about the hissing leak methane punctures in the value proposition of natural gas in a lower carbon future.

The irony is that the biggest cost to industry’s standing and license to operate – not to mention efficiency in conserving natural resources – would come in not making those investments.

As industry lobbies EPA to review its own methane rule, they should take stock of lessons learned from the BLM experience.

3. There is a plus side.

It’s also time to see what opportunities the BLM rule offers.

First, the BLM rule takes aim at routine flaring – which is not just an eyesore, but represents a loss of natural gas and a waste of taxpayer dollars. Operators should now make the investments and operational changes needed to end this wasteful practice.

Second, the BLM rule requires semi-annual leak detection and repair practices at well pads, and quarterly inspections at compressor stations. As these requirements (and similar ones from EPA and in several states) remain in force, industry has every incentive to support innovation in technologies and practices to detect leaks even more quickly and efficiently than ever before.

A growing industry is ready to step up to this challenge: Start-ups like Quanta3, made-in-America businesses like Sensit, and even large firms like IBM are here to learn about operator needs, to demonstrate their technologies and approaches, and to build a factual record that can support regulatory approval as an alternative. These win-win opportunities are good for the environment and for business, but they won’t be seized without industry leadership.

The BLM and EPA rules are both opportunities for industry, not just costs. Industry should take note, and move forward heeding the wishes of the majority of Americans.

Image source: Tim Evanson, Flickr

Originally posted on May 18, 2017 by Audubon Louisiana. The tallest bird in North America nearly went extinct, and it is still teetering on the edge. Anyone who has seen a Great Egret knows the grandeur of such birds, but the Whooping Crane towers over the tallest herons and egrets, being 50% taller, and having a wingspan of 7.5 feet. Bright white, with a gallant red facial pattern, the magnificent Whooping Crane is being reintroduced into Louisiana, with the hopes ...

Read The Full Story

The post Whoop Whoop for the Return of the Whoopers! appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

Originally posted on May 18, 2017 by Audubon Louisiana. The tallest bird in North America nearly went extinct, and it is still teetering on the edge. Anyone who has seen a Great Egret knows the grandeur of such birds, but the Whooping Crane towers over the tallest herons and egrets, being 50% taller, and having a wingspan of 7.5 feet. Bright white, with a gallant red facial pattern, the magnificent Whooping Crane is being reintroduced into Louisiana, with the hopes ...

Read The Full Story

The post Whoop Whoop for the Return of the Whoopers! appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

Originally posted on May 18, 2017 by Audubon Louisiana. The tallest bird in North America nearly went extinct, and it is still teetering on the edge. Anyone who has seen a Great Egret knows the grandeur of such birds, but the Whooping Crane towers over the tallest herons and egrets, being 50% taller, and having a wingspan of 7.5 feet. Bright white, with a gallant red facial pattern, the magnificent Whooping Crane is being reintroduced into Louisiana, with the hopes ...

Read The Full Story

The post Whoop Whoop for the Return of the Whoopers! appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

Ohio just put the brakes on FirstEnergy’s nuclear bailout – a win for customers. @dickmunson's statement: edf.org/7FE

  “As our population sky-rockets, climate change restructures the ecosystems we inhabit, and our unsustainable food systems begin to break down, our world is crying out for designs that re-imagine the way that we humans do pretty much everything on Earth – designs that are in greater alignment. We appear to be stuck working only with what can be observed and already exists, rather than imagining and creating what is trying to emerge.” – “Creating Breakout Innovation,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, ...

Read The Full Story

The post Breakout Innovation: Collaborative Planning for Sustainable Coastal Communities appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

  “As our population sky-rockets, climate change restructures the ecosystems we inhabit, and our unsustainable food systems begin to break down, our world is crying out for designs that re-imagine the way that we humans do pretty much everything on Earth – designs that are in greater alignment. We appear to be stuck working only with what can be observed and already exists, rather than imagining and creating what is trying to emerge.” – “Creating Breakout Innovation,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, ...

Read The Full Story

The post Breakout Innovation: Collaborative Planning for Sustainable Coastal Communities appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

  “As our population sky-rockets, climate change restructures the ecosystems we inhabit, and our unsustainable food systems begin to break down, our world is crying out for designs that re-imagine the way that we humans do pretty much everything on Earth – designs that are in greater alignment. We appear to be stuck working only with what can be observed and already exists, rather than imagining and creating what is trying to emerge.” – “Creating Breakout Innovation,” Stanford Social Innovation Review, ...

Read The Full Story

The post Breakout Innovation: Collaborative Planning for Sustainable Coastal Communities appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.

By Jim Marston

Americans are switching to cleaner cars and electricity. In addition to being smart purchases, these clean energy choices could be a political statement. Consumers are choosing to use their hard-earned dollars to show what they want: clean energy, a clean economy, and government policies that reflect their values.

Last month, electric-car company Tesla was valued higher than General Motors, making it the most valuable U.S. carmaker based on market capitalization. Despite low gas prices, U.S. sales of plug-in electric vehicles increased by 70 percent in January from the same month in 2016. The Chevrolet Volt alone saw an 84 percent increase during the same time.

The increase in electric car sales isn’t surprising in light of The Consumer as Climate Activist, a scientific article published by researchers from Yale University, George Mason University, and the University of Texas. They found that Americans are more likely to engage in consumer activism than political activism to combat climate change. And consumer activism for clean energy is on the rise.

According to Dallas-based Clearview Energy, which provides customers with electricity generated by water, solar, wind, and geothermal power, their web sales have increased by 500 percent since the presidential election in November.

Purchasing power over politics: American consumers buy more clean energy and electric cars
Click To Tweet

Clearview CEO Frank McGovern says, “Every time Trump threatens to dismantle the EPA, our green energy plan sales skyrocket.”

These trends suggest that Americans could be fighting back with their purchasing power against the Trump administration’s assault on clean energy, which has been far-reaching since his inauguration in January:

• Newly-minted Secretary of Energy Rick Perry recently ordered the Energy Department to study whether requiring coal plants to reduce their pollution while incentivizing cleaner energy sources is responsible for coal’s irreversible decline. The results of a study based on this premise are primed for use as propaganda to prop up the uneconomic coal industry, because government data clearly shows low natural gas prices, declining electricity demand, and plummeting costs for renewables are the reasons for coal’s demise.
• Trump’s 2018 budget proposal, released in March, aimed to significantly defund a number of federal clean energy programs and energy efficiency efforts (including the broadly-supported Energy Star program). While Congress recently reached a budget deal to fund these critical programs through fiscal year 2017, September (when the 2018 budget must be voted on) is now the new showdown date for the future of federally-funded clean energy programs.
• Trump said he would review car fuel-efficiency protections that require the industry to deliver a fleet average of at least 54.5 mpg by 2025. California Gov. Jerry Brown called the President’s move toward potentially axing clean cars an “unconscionable gift for polluters.” California and New York plan to challenge the action with a lawsuit against the EPA.
• EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has publicly questioned whether carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to climate change.

As consumers, we can use our purchases to change the way power is made and change the powers that be. So let’s be smart, let’s be strategic, and let’s fight the good fight. You have choices as a consumer – whether you’re buying your next car, choosing your electricity provider, installing solar on your home roof, or replacing a home appliance. Make a statement and choose to buy clean.

Photo credit: John Rae

By Jim Marston

Americans are switching to cleaner cars and electricity. In addition to being smart purchases, these clean energy choices could be a political statement. Consumers are choosing to use their hard-earned dollars to show what they want: clean energy, a clean economy, and government policies that reflect their values.

Last month, electric-car company Tesla was valued higher than General Motors, making it the most valuable U.S. carmaker based on market capitalization. Despite low gas prices, U.S. sales of plug-in electric vehicles increased by 70 percent in January from the same month in 2016. The Chevrolet Volt alone saw an 84 percent increase during the same time.

The increase in electric car sales isn’t surprising in light of The Consumer as Climate Activist, a scientific article published by researchers from Yale University, George Mason University, and the University of Texas. They found that Americans are more likely to engage in consumer activism than political activism to combat climate change. And consumer activism for clean energy is on the rise.

According to Dallas-based Clearview Energy, which provides customers with electricity generated by water, solar, wind, and geothermal power, their web sales have increased by 500 percent since the presidential election in November.

Purchasing power over politics: American consumers buy more clean energy and electric cars
Click To Tweet

Clearview CEO Frank McGovern says, “Every time Trump threatens to dismantle the EPA, our green energy plan sales skyrocket.”

These trends suggest that Americans could be fighting back with their purchasing power against the Trump administration’s assault on clean energy, which has been far-reaching since his inauguration in January:

• Newly-minted Secretary of Energy Rick Perry recently ordered the Energy Department to study whether requiring coal plants to reduce their pollution while incentivizing cleaner energy sources is responsible for coal’s irreversible decline. The results of a study based on this premise are primed for use as propaganda to prop up the uneconomic coal industry, because government data clearly shows low natural gas prices, declining electricity demand, and plummeting costs for renewables are the reasons for coal’s demise.
• Trump’s 2018 budget proposal, released in March, aimed to significantly defund a number of federal clean energy programs and energy efficiency efforts (including the broadly-supported Energy Star program). While Congress recently reached a budget deal to fund these critical programs through fiscal year 2017, September (when the 2018 budget must be voted on) is now the new showdown date for the future of federally-funded clean energy programs.
• Trump said he would review car fuel-efficiency protections that require the industry to deliver a fleet average of at least 54.5 mpg by 2025. California Gov. Jerry Brown called the President’s move toward potentially axing clean cars an “unconscionable gift for polluters.” California and New York plan to challenge the action with a lawsuit against the EPA.
• EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has publicly questioned whether carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to climate change.

As consumers, we can use our purchases to change the way power is made and change the powers that be. So let’s be smart, let’s be strategic, and let’s fight the good fight. You have choices as a consumer – whether you’re buying your next car, choosing your electricity provider, installing solar on your home roof, or replacing a home appliance. Make a statement and choose to buy clean.

Photo credit: John Rae

By Jim Marston

Americans are switching to cleaner cars and electricity. In addition to being smart purchases, these clean energy choices could be a political statement. Consumers are choosing to use their hard-earned dollars to show what they want: clean energy, a clean economy, and government policies that reflect their values.

Last month, electric-car company Tesla was valued higher than General Motors, making it the most valuable U.S. carmaker based on market capitalization. Despite low gas prices, U.S. sales of plug-in electric vehicles increased by 70 percent in January from the same month in 2016. The Chevrolet Volt alone saw an 84 percent increase during the same time.

The increase in electric car sales isn’t surprising in light of The Consumer as Climate Activist, a scientific article published by researchers from Yale University, George Mason University, and the University of Texas. They found that Americans are more likely to engage in consumer activism than political activism to combat climate change. And consumer activism for clean energy is on the rise.

According to Dallas-based Clearview Energy, which provides customers with electricity generated by water, solar, wind, and geothermal power, their web sales have increased by 500 percent since the presidential election in November.

Purchasing power over politics: American consumers buy more clean energy and electric cars
Click To Tweet

Clearview CEO Frank McGovern says, “Every time Trump threatens to dismantle the EPA, our green energy plan sales skyrocket.”

These trends suggest that Americans could be fighting back with their purchasing power against the Trump administration’s assault on clean energy, which has been far-reaching since his inauguration in January:

• Newly-minted Secretary of Energy Rick Perry recently ordered the Energy Department to study whether requiring coal plants to reduce their pollution while incentivizing cleaner energy sources is responsible for coal’s irreversible decline. The results of a study based on this premise are primed for use as propaganda to prop up the uneconomic coal industry, because government data clearly shows low natural gas prices, declining electricity demand, and plummeting costs for renewables are the reasons for coal’s demise.
• Trump’s 2018 budget proposal, released in March, aimed to significantly defund a number of federal clean energy programs and energy efficiency efforts (including the broadly-supported Energy Star program). While Congress recently reached a budget deal to fund these critical programs through fiscal year 2017, September (when the 2018 budget must be voted on) is now the new showdown date for the future of federally-funded clean energy programs.
• Trump said he would review car fuel-efficiency protections that require the industry to deliver a fleet average of at least 54.5 mpg by 2025. California Gov. Jerry Brown called the President’s move toward potentially axing clean cars an “unconscionable gift for polluters.” California and New York plan to challenge the action with a lawsuit against the EPA.
• EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has publicly questioned whether carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to climate change.

As consumers, we can use our purchases to change the way power is made and change the powers that be. So let’s be smart, let’s be strategic, and let’s fight the good fight. You have choices as a consumer – whether you’re buying your next car, choosing your electricity provider, installing solar on your home roof, or replacing a home appliance. Make a statement and choose to buy clean.

Photo credit: John Rae

By Jim Marston

Americans are switching to cleaner cars and electricity. In addition to being smart purchases, these clean energy choices could be a political statement. Consumers are choosing to use their hard-earned dollars to show what they want: clean energy, a clean economy, and government policies that reflect their values.

Last month, electric-car company Tesla was valued higher than General Motors, making it the most valuable U.S. carmaker based on market capitalization. Despite low gas prices, U.S. sales of plug-in electric vehicles increased by 70 percent in January from the same month in 2016. The Chevrolet Volt alone saw an 84 percent increase during the same time.

The increase in electric car sales isn’t surprising in light of The Consumer as Climate Activist, a scientific article published by researchers from Yale University, George Mason University, and the University of Texas. They found that Americans are more likely to engage in consumer activism than political activism to combat climate change. And consumer activism for clean energy is on the rise.

According to Dallas-based Clearview Energy, which provides customers with electricity generated by water, solar, wind, and geothermal power, their web sales have increased by 500 percent since the presidential election in November.

Purchasing power over politics: American consumers buy more clean energy and electric cars
Click To Tweet

Clearview CEO Frank McGovern says, “Every time Trump threatens to dismantle the EPA, our green energy plan sales skyrocket.”

These trends suggest that Americans could be fighting back with their purchasing power against the Trump administration’s assault on clean energy, which has been far-reaching since his inauguration in January:

• Newly-minted Secretary of Energy Rick Perry recently ordered the Energy Department to study whether requiring coal plants to reduce their pollution while incentivizing cleaner energy sources is responsible for coal’s irreversible decline. The results of a study based on this premise are primed for use as propaganda to prop up the uneconomic coal industry, because government data clearly shows low natural gas prices, declining electricity demand, and plummeting costs for renewables are the reasons for coal’s demise.
• Trump’s 2018 budget proposal, released in March, aimed to significantly defund a number of federal clean energy programs and energy efficiency efforts (including the broadly-supported Energy Star program). While Congress recently reached a budget deal to fund these critical programs through fiscal year 2017, September (when the 2018 budget must be voted on) is now the new showdown date for the future of federally-funded clean energy programs.
• Trump said he would review car fuel-efficiency protections that require the industry to deliver a fleet average of at least 54.5 mpg by 2025. California Gov. Jerry Brown called the President’s move toward potentially axing clean cars an “unconscionable gift for polluters.” California and New York plan to challenge the action with a lawsuit against the EPA.
• EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has publicly questioned whether carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to climate change.

As consumers, we can use our purchases to change the way power is made and change the powers that be. So let’s be smart, let’s be strategic, and let’s fight the good fight. You have choices as a consumer – whether you’re buying your next car, choosing your electricity provider, installing solar on your home roof, or replacing a home appliance. Make a statement and choose to buy clean.

Photo credit: John Rae

Written by Katy Farber

Following the publication of my article, Poisoning the Minds of Children: Climate Denial Book Sent to Schools, I want to share reactions from teachers and students about the “textbook” that was allegedly sent to every science teacher in the nation by the Koch Brothers funded, Heartland Institute. This book, touted as a scientifically valid textbook, is a deliberate disinformation attempt to sow doubt about the climate change crisis.

Since my article came out, and the book’s release, there have been reactions from the educational community and the press.

In a recent article in the New York Times, one teacher explained why she opened the cleverly designed envelope the book came in:

“One academic in Albany told me that hers arrived in an envelope bearing the headline of a New York Times article about an investigation into Exxon Mobil for possibly lying about climate change. “I was in a rush, and all I noticed was the word ‘climate’ in a New York Times headline,” she said. “That made me open it rather than throw it out.”

The National Science Teachers Association‘s executive director, David Evans, didn’t mince words:

“Labeling propaganda as science does not make it so.”

Evans called Heartland‘s mass mailing of the book an “unprecedented attack” on science education.

Students are having none of this climate denial, either. In California, high school students visited California Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a known climate denier, to give him two textbooks on climate change. When they attempted to voice their concerns, they were shut out of the office – even after knocking, using the intercom, and leaving a message. For several students, this was their first participation in activism – and they will persist.

Unfortunately, this disinformation campaign isn’t going away anytime soon. According to Heartland:

“Why Scientists Disagree is a small book, only 110 pages long, but it is actually only a single chapter of a much longer book that is in preparation for publication, Climate Change Reconsidered II: Benefits and Costs of Fossil Fuels, produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC).”

In addition to the Times, Moms Clean Air Force wasn’t the only group to take notice of the attack on America’s teachers. The organization, Do Something, started a campaign to organize the nation’s science teachers and students to reject these “textbooks” from getting into America’s classrooms. Do Something provides a pledge for teachers, asking them not to share climate lies and denial in their classrooms.

Bill Bigelow, the curriculum editor of Rethinking Schools, has been studying this issue nationwide, and edited a teacher-created curriculum grounded in sound climate science.

Rethinking Schools launched a campaign to offer free copies of the curriculum book to teachers in six states where fossil fuel industry lawmakers are advancing legislation supporting climate denial in schools: Texas, Oklahoma, Indiana, Alabama, Florida, and Idaho.

Here’s Bigelow’s response about the Heartland mailing:

“We need to sound the alarm about the Heartland Institute’s well-funded attempt to poison teachers’ understanding of the climate crisis. However, the sad truth is that the textbook industry has long adopted a skeptical stance toward the human causes of climate change. This is one reason the Portland, Oregon, school board unanimously adopted a “climate justice” resolution last year, calling on the school district to “abandon the use of any adopted text material that is found to express doubt about the severity of the climate crisis or its root in human activities.” It’s important for schools to reject the Heartland Institute’s propaganda, but it’s no less important that teachers, parents, and community members work to create a curriculum that helps students think deeply about the causes and consequences of climate change–and what all of us can do about it.”

A high school biology teacher from Vermont told me he uses the book to prop up his computer.

The mailing also reached college science professors. Ted Fink, a professor at Marist College School of Science, said this of the mailing:

“The book and DVD was a thinly veiled attempt to impersonate credible scientific research with a mix of misinformation that appeals to economic self-interest and a sense of patriotism. Heartland works hard to make their arguments sound credible. Almost all of their assertions have been debunked. Skeptical Science is a great resource for anyone who has questions about the veracity of Heartland’s claims.”

It’s our job as teachers and parents to help kids recognize propaganda and fake news. By providing vetted and credible sources, teachers can share real data and scientific facts with their students to help them understand and prevent the growing crisis of climate change.

While there’s no way to gauge what Heartland’s latest attempt at climate disinformation will have on educators and students across the nation, it sure highlights how anti-science politics have infiltrated our families in a most dangerous way.

Photo: Rhett Allain via Twitter

TELL YOUR SENATOR: PROTECT OUR HEALTH FROM AIR AND CLIMATE POLLUTION

We’re at a crucial moment for our coast. Louisiana’s 2017 Coastal Master Plan – the state’s blueprint for restoration and protection over the next five years – is making its way through the Louisiana Legislature. This plan and the projects it contains are critical to the protection of Louisiana’s communities and culture. To celebrate the culture that Louisiana’s coast supports and to raise awareness to the need to restore our coast and support the Coastal Master Plan, we held a ...

Read The Full Story

The post Coastal Louisiana Supporters Rally at Concert for the Coast appeared first on Restore the Mississippi River Delta.