February, 16 2012, 09:31am EDT
House Bill Swaps Clean Transportation for Dirtiest of Fuels
This week, Republican leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives has begun debate on a package of transportation bills that radically reshapes the country's transportation investments by eliminating all dedicated federal funding for mass transit and for biking and walking safety, and cripples the environmental review process for transportation projects. The bills also opens the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts, as well as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to new oil drilling, while also opening sensitive landscapes in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming to oil shale extraction.
WASHINGTON
This week, Republican leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives has begun debate on a package of transportation bills that radically reshapes the country's transportation investments by eliminating all dedicated federal funding for mass transit and for biking and walking safety, and cripples the environmental review process for transportation projects. The bills also opens the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf coasts, as well as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to new oil drilling, while also opening sensitive landscapes in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming to oil shale extraction. Lastly, the bill forces the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, despite the State Department's determination that further environmental review of the project would be necessary. In an attempt to secure enough votes for these proposals, House Republicans have now split the bill into three parts, with the energy provisions included in HR 3408 and the transportation provisions included in HR 7. The bills would automatically combine upon passage.
Environment America's Preservation Advocate Nancy Pyne issued this statement in response:
"Transportation is responsible for one-third of our global warming pollution and two-thirds of our dangerous dependence on oil, but it doesn't have to be this way--we can invest in clean, efficient travel choices like public transit that will move our nation away from oil and toward a brighter, healthier future. Sadly, this bill throws that future under the bus. This bill will force our country to burn more oil every day by robbing us of clean transportation choices. It's no wonder the House leadership has had to resort to legislative gimmicks, breaking the bill into pieces to attempt to pass it.
"Furthermore, this bill is yet another attack from House leadership that has proven it will stop at nothing to let Big Oil trash the places we love, the air we breathe and the water we drink. Supporters of this bill want to open our coastlines and our most pristine wilderness areas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling--but we need only look to the BP disaster for a tragic reminder that drilling is a dirty and dangerous business. The only way to truly keep our coasts and pristine Alaskan wilderness areas safe is to keep drilling rigs out. Our research shows that clean beaches and healthy oceans are much more valuable than drilling for the last drops of oil off our coasts.
"Moving ahead on oil shale extraction is also incredibly risky. This bill would open oil shale development in sensitive public lands in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah, endangering drinking water sources while destroying landscapes and pumping out air pollution at truly alarming rates. Finally, the bill rubber stamps the Keystone XL pipeline, ignoring the real risks of pumping corrosive tar sands through America's heartland and further deepening our addiction to ever more toxic, high risk forms of oil. If Big Oil could write its own transportation bill, it would look a whole lot like this. The House of Representatives should reject this bill immediately."
With Environment America, you protect the places that all of us love and promote core environmental values, such as clean air to breathe, clean water to drink, and clean energy to power our lives. We're a national network of 29 state environmental groups with members and supporters in every state. Together, we focus on timely, targeted action that wins tangible improvements in the quality of our environment and our lives.
(303) 801-0581LATEST NEWS
Youth Lead Global Strike Demanding 'Climate Justice Now'
"We are many people and youths who want to express our frustration over what decision-makers are doing right now: They don't care about our future and aren't doing anything to stop the climate crisis," one young activist said.
Apr 19, 2024
Ahead of Earth Day, young people around the world are participating in a global strike on Friday to demand "climate justice now."
In Sweden, Greta Thunberg joined hundreds of other demonstrators for a march in Stockholm; in Kenya, participants demanded that their government join the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty; and in the U.S., youth activists are kicking off more than 200 Earth Day protests directed at pressing President Joe Biden to declare a climate emergency.
"We're gathered here to fight, once again, for climate justice," Thunberg toldAgence France-Presse at the Stockholm protest, which drew around 500 people. "It's now been more than five and a half years that we've been doing the same thing, organizing big global strikes for the climate and gathering people, youths from the entire world."
"I lost my home to climate change. Now I'm fighting so that others don't lose their homes."
The first global youth climate strike, which grew out of Thunberg's Fridays for Future school strikes, took place on March 15, 2019. Since then, both emissions and temperatures have continued to rise, with 2023 blowing past the record for hottest year. Yet, according to Climate Action Tracker, no country has policies in place that are compatible with limiting global heating to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels.
"We are many people and youths who want to express our frustration over what decision-makers are doing right now: They don't care about our future and aren't doing anything to stop the climate crisis," Karla Alfaro Gripe, an 18-year-old participant at the Stockholm march, told AFP.
The global strikes are taking place under the umbrella of Friday's for Future, which has three main demands: 1. limit temperature rise to 1.5°C, 2. ensure climate justice and equity, and 3. listen to the most accurate, up-to-date science."Fight with us for a world worth living in," the group wrote on their website, next to a link inviting visitors to find actions in their countries.
Participants shared videos and images of their actions on social media.
European strikers also gathered in London, Dublin, and Madrid.
In Asia, Save Future Bangladesh founder Nayon Sorkar posted a video from the Meghna River on Bangladesh's Bola Island, where erosion destroyed his family's home when he was three years old.
"I lost my home to climate change," Sorkar wrote. "Now I'm fighting so that others don't lose their homes."
Also in Bangladesh, larger crowds rallied in Dhaka, Sylhet, Feni, and Bandarban for climate action.
"Young climate activists in Bandarban demand a shift to renewable energy and away from fossil fuels," said Sajjad Hossain, the divisional coordinator for Youthnet for Climate Justice Bangladesh. "We voiced urgency for sustainable energy strategies and climate justice. Let's hold governments accountable for a just transition!"
In Kenya, young people struck specifically to demand that the government sign on to the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"As a member of the Lake Victoria community, the importance of the treaty in our climate strikes cannot be overstated," Rahmina Paullette, founder of Kisumu Environmental Champions and a coordinator for Fridays for Future Africa, said in a statement. "By advocating for its implementation, we address the triple threat of climate change, plastic pollution, and environmental injustice facing our nation."
"Halting fossil fuel expansion not only safeguards crucial ecosystems but also combats the unjust impacts of environmental degradation, ensuring a more equitable and sustainable future for our community and the wider Kenyan society," Paullette said.
In the U.S., Fridays for Future NYC planned for what they expected to be the largest New York City climate protest since September 2023's March to End Fossil Fuels. The action will begin at Foley Square at 2:00 pm Eastern Time, at which point more than 1,000 students and organizers are expected to walk across the Brooklyn Bridge to rally in front of Borough Hall.
The strike "is part of a national escalation of youth-led actions in more than 200 cities and college campuses around the country, all calling on President Biden to listen to our generation and young voters, stop expanding fossil fuels, and declare a climate emergency that meaningfully addresses fossil fuels, creating millions of good paying union jobs, and preparing us for climate disasters in the process," Fridays for Future NYC said in a statement.
The coalition behind the climate emergency drive, which also includes the Sunrise Movement, Fridays for Future USA, and Campus Climate Network, got encouraging news on Wednesday when Bloomberg reported that the White House had reopened internal discussions into potentially declaring a climate emergency.
"We're staring down another summer of floods, fires, hurricanes, and extreme heat," Sunrise executive director Aru Shiney-Ajay said in a statement. "Biden must do what right Republicans in Congress are unwilling to do: Stand up to oil and gas CEOs, create green union jobs, and prepare us for climate disasters. Biden must declare a climate emergency and use every tool at his disposal to tackle the climate crisis and prepare our communities to weather the storm. If Biden wants to be taken seriously by young people, he needs to deliver on climate change."
The coalition is planning events leading up to Monday including dozens of Earth Day teach-ins beginning Friday to encourage members of Congress to pressure Biden on a climate emergency and Reclaim Earth Day mobilizations on more than 100 college and university campuses to demand that schools divest from and cut ties with the fossil fuel industry.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ahead of Plastics Treaty Summit, Studies Make Case for Stopping Pollution at the Source
"Whether the treaty includes plastic production cuts is not just a policy debate," said one expert. "It's a matter of survival."
Apr 19, 2024
As worldwide government officials, civil society groups, and activists prepare to head to Ottawa, Canada for the fourth session of Global Plastics Treaty negotiations, climate advocates urged attendees to keep in mind the new findings of scientists who showed Thursday that plastic production—not waste—is the main driver of the synthetic substances' planet-heating emissions.
The federally funded Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in Berkeley, California released a paper showing that the greenhouse gas emissions of the plastics industry are equivalent to those of about 600 coal-fired power plants and are four times higher than those of the airline sector.
Lobbyists for the plastics industry, along with countries that are home to the world's biggest fossil fuel polluters, have pushed for a plastics treaty that centers waste management and a "circular economy" in which waste plastic is used indefinitely to produce new synthetic products.
But the Lawrence Berkeley scientists found that 75% of the greenhouse gas emissions caused by plastics are released before the plastic compounds are even created by the polymerization process.
"Plastics' impact on the climate starts with extraction," said the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) in a policy brief on the lab's findings. "To fully capture, measure, evaluate, and address the impacts of plastic pollution, assessment, and regulatory controls must consider the complete lifecycle, beginning with extraction."
According to Lawrence Berkeley's research, if plastic production remains at its current level, it could burn through roughly one-fifth the planet's remaining carbon budget, pushing the Earth closer to planetary heating that exceeds 1.5°C.
"To avoid breaching the 1.5°C limit set by the Paris [climate] agreement," said GAIA, "primary plastic production must decrease by at least 12% to 17% per year, starting in 2024."
To achieve that goal, said the Center for Financial Accountability on Thursday, fossil fuel-producing countries must stop treating the Global Plastics Treaty "as a waste management treaty."
"While global leaders are trying to negotiate a solution to the plastic crisis, the petrochemical industry is investing billions of dollars in making the problem rapidly worse," said GAIA science and policy director Neil Tangri, a senior fellow at University of California, Berkeley. "We need a global agreement to stop this cancerous growth, bring down plastic production, and usher in a world with less plastic and less pollution."
At the third session of the the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-3) last year, 143 plastics industry lobbyists registered to attend, prompting advocates to call for their exclusion from future summits.
On Sunday, ahead of the meetings set to take place from April 23-29, the Break Free From Plastic movement is planning to march through Ottawa, to demand "strong conflict of interest policies that protect the treaty negotiations and its implementation from the vested interests of industries that are profiting" from the growing plastic pollution crisis.
The campaigners will also demand a negotiation process that respects the rights of Indigenous people, a treaty that supports "non-toxic reuse systems" and rejects a "circular economy" model, and limiting and reducing plastic production a "non-negotiable requirement to end plastic pollution."
Dr. Jorge Emmanuel, a co-author of GAIA's policy brief and a research fellow at Siliman University in the Philippines, said the climate impacts that have already hit his country illustrate the need for a strong Global Plastics Treaty.
"The Philippines is on the frontlines of both climate change and plastic pollution," said Emmanuel. "Heatwaves, powerful typhoons, and flooding are getting worse, and the petrochemical industry has displaced our traditional systems with mountains of plastic that poison our communities."
"Whether the treaty includes plastic production cuts is not just a policy debate," he added. "It's a matter of survival."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Privacy Defenders Decry 'Spy Draft' in Section 702 Renewal Advanced by Senate
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," explained one critic.
Apr 18, 2024
Civil liberties defenders on Thursday decried the U.S. Senate's advancement of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which critics say lawmakers are trying to ram through without protection against warrantless surveillance and with a provision that would effectively make every American a spy whether they like it or not.
Senators voted 67-32 in favor of a cloture motion to begin voting on RISAA, a bill to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which expires on Friday. FISA—a highly controversial law that has been abused hundreds of thousands of times—allows warrantless surveillance of non-U.S. citizens but also often sweeps up Americans' communication data in the process.
In a 273-147 vote last week, House lawmakers passed RISAA, including an amendment critics say dramatically expands the government's unchecked surveillance authority by compelling a wide range of individuals and organizations—including businesses and the media—to cooperate in government spying operations.
This so-called "Make Everyone a Spy" clause would allow the attorney general or director of national intelligence to force electronic communication service providers to "immediately provide... all information, facilities, or assistance" the government deems necessary.
"This bill would basically allow the government to institute a spy draft," Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, warned Thursday. "It will lead to significant distrust between journalists and sources, not to mention everyone else."
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," he added. "Regardless of whether the end target of the surveillance is a foreigner, it's indisputable that the people the government can enlist to conduct the surveillance are Americans. And what's more, these civilians ordered to spy would be gagged and sworn to secrecy under the law."
In addition to the "Make Everyone a Spy" provision, civil libertarians have sounded the alarm over the House lawmakers' rejection of an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the legislation.
Critics accuse Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and colleagues including Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) of trying to rush a vote on RISAA while disingenuously claiming Section 702's powers will expire with the law on Friday. That's a misleading claim, as a national security court earlier this month approved the government's request to continue a disputed surveillance program even if Section 702 lapses.
"There is simply no defense of Majority Leader Schumer and Sen. Warner's duplicity," Sean Vitka, policy director at the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, said in a statement. "House Intelligence Committee leaders poisoned this bill with one of the most repugnant surveillance expansions in history, and apparently the administration was too busy attacking commonsense privacy protections to notice. They know it, we know it, and now the American people know it."
"There can be no mistake: Sens. Schumer and Warner just helped hand the next president an unspeakably dangerous weapon that will be used against their own constituents," Vitka added. "And there is only one vote left to stop it."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—who
said earlier this week that the bill would dragoon the American people into becoming "an agent for Big Brother"—on Thursday argued that "this issue demands a debate about meaningful reforms, not a rushed vote to rubber-stamp more warrantless government surveillance powers."
In an attempt to tackle the warrantless surveillance issue, Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) on Thursday proposed a RISAA amendment that would require the government to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court before accessing Americans' private communications.
However, the amendment contains exceptions to the warrant requirement in the event of unspecified emergencies and cyberattacks.
"If the government wants to spy on the private communications of Americans, they should be required to get approval from a judge—just as our Founders intended," Durbin said in a statement. "Congress has a responsibility to the American people to get this right."
The Biden administration and U.S. intelligence agencies vehemently oppose the Durbin-Cramer amendment. The White House called the measure "a reckless policy choice contrary to the key lessons of 9/11 and not grounded in any constitutional requirement or statute."
"The amendment outright bars the government from gaining access to lawfully collected information using terms associated with U.S. persons," the administration added. "Exceptions to that prohibition are narrow and unworkable. They are insufficient to protect our national security."
On Wednesday, the House also passed the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act, which would prohibit the government from buying Americans' information from data brokers if it would otherwise need a warrant to obtain the data, which includes location and internet records. The Senate will now take up FANFSA.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular