Moving Susquehanna Valley Forward

Film Underscores Impacts of Climate Change

by

Last night, CommUnity Zone and Susquehanna Valley Progressives co-sponsored a screening of Al Gore’s latest film, An Inconvenient Sequel at The Campus Theater in Lewisburg.

The film is a sequel to An Inconvenient Truth, which was released a decade ago and brought climate change into the heart of popular culture.An Inconvenient Sequel, shows just how accurate many of the predictions made in the first film were and, more importantly, how close we are to a real energy revolution.

120 people came out to watch the film and  a few dozen came to the subsequent discussion, which was moderated by local climate advocate Peterson Toscano and included panelists: Rob Altenburg of PennFuture and Dr. Nino Antadze, a visiting professor at Bucknell University .

Donations (a total of $371!) were collected at the film for the hurricane victims in Puerto Rico as these powerful hurricanes are becoming more and more prevalent due to warming air and water temperatures. 100% of the funds collected will be contributed to United for Puerto Rico. United for Puerto Rico is an initiative brought forth by the First lady of Puerto Rico, Beatriz Rosselló in collaboration with the private sector, with the purpose of providing aid and support to those affected in Puerto Rico by the passage of Hurricane Irma and Hurricane María.

The film underscores the devastating impacts of climate change, the resolve of many political, civic and religious leaders (on all sides of the political aisle) to take action, and the need for more to be done.

Al Gore and his organization, Climate Reality Project, are coming to Pennsylvania later in October to host the 36th Climate Reality Leadership Corps activist training in Pittsburgh. Over the course of three days, world class scientists, communicators, and climate experts will join former US Vice President and Climate Reality Founder and Chairman Al Gore to train citizens to become Climate Reality Leaders, who organize their communities for action on the climate crisis. Several local advocates plan to attend.

Susquehanna Valley Progressives is a nonpartisan organization united for the betterment of the whole community. We envision a community that empowers individuals to be engaged in and educated on the democratic process; promotes equality and appreciation of diversity; improves the living and working standards of all that live in Susquehanna Valley and actively protects our natural world. Learn more at SVProgress.org.

The CommUnity Zone unites area nonprofit organizations and the people in our community through collaborations to conduct and support community education and build capacity to sustain and improve a quality of life for all community residents. We are particularly interested in ways to empower all voices in the achievement of personal goals. Learn more at CommUnityZoneLewisburg.org.

I am only one, but still I am one

by

Many of us in some quiet moment ask ourselves whether our life has had meaning or what our life has meant to this point. We are capable of looking back at our past and projecting our possible futures. This is a very human process. The search for meaning is an ongoing process. Some may look to books like Dr. Victor Frankel’s Man’s Search for Meaning. A Book that may provide a few answers to some. Even in the last year of my seventh decade I still don’t have any solid answers to these questions.

One thing that appears certain, whatever the meaning of life, is that in all of life’s many forms the greatest drive is the continuation of the species. While the human species is also driven to reproduce, we also seem to be driven to destroy ourselves and the life around us. Our actions and our actions alone now pose a threat to the future of our species and many of our fellow creatures. Through a combination of our ignorance, greed, thoughtlessness, selfishness, and laziness the life on this planet has entered the planet’s sixth major extinction period.

Ignorance of this fact is no excuse for not acting to protect future generations of our own kind and all other life forms. Life forms on which we are absolutely dependent. We are not the creators of life and have no right to be the cause of life’s destruction. We have developed a culture whose only goal seems to be the acquisition of more and more of everything. Our drive to acquire appears to be insatiable. We take no notice of the destruction that results from the production of ever more stuff in our personal quest of acquisition. We are busily laying up treasures which moth and rust corrupt. Chris Hedges has written

If I were to ask which has more value, a pound of gold or a pound of good soil, the probable choice of most would be the gold. Yet we can live and thrive without gold but life for us would be impossible without good soil. We are now heedlessly supporting a system of agriculture and economics which is destroying the planet’s fertility. Our country has already lost over a third of its topsoil. Every bushel of corn grown by this system results is the loss of forty-four pounds of top soil. We take fertile ground and bury under asphalt. Our industrial agriculture’s only goal is profit, not the long term health of the land. We us pesticides and herbicides so liberally that much runs off to poison or lakes and streams. Billions of pounds of animal waste adds to this toxic brew. We have created vast dead zones in the Chesapeake Bay and the Gulf of Mexico.

We not only poison the soil with our vast array of readily available chemicals, we poison our own bodies. There is much debate over abortion in this country, but those fighting to end all abortions seem to be unconcerned about the toxic substances that enter these same embryos and fetuses. With little thought or testing we now subject the life of our planet with over 80,000 man-made chemicals.

Our corporations are amoral entities that pursue profits by externalizing as many costs as possible. They fight any attempt to prevent their polluting our air and water. If corporations really were people, they would be classified as psychopaths. They never feel guilt or remorse for their destructive actions. They do all they can to absolve themselves of responsibility. Ever hear any Wall Street bankers apologize for collapsing the economy? Monsanto now produces seeds for plants are really pesticides. We are all lab rats in the experiment on the safety of GMO’s. Chris Hedges has written “the mania for ceaseless economic expansion and exploitation has become a curse, a death sentence.”

It is a matter of observable fact that life is rapidly vanishing from the planet as a direct result of our actions. This is not speculation or a matter of opinion. It is an observable fact. It is we who are clearcutting the great rainforests on earth and the greatest diversity of life on the planet. We value cheap hamburgers more than life’s diversity. It is we who are stripping the oceans of the world of life far faster than they can recover. It is we who are causing desertification around the world. Our demand for every more beef has caused the destruction of hundreds of thousands rangeland acres.

The mere fact that there are environmental organizations makes a statement about the nature of our civilization and culture. Why would a sane culture need them? Environmental groups though they win a battle here and there are losing the fight to protect the planet. What I find most disturbing about the “big green” groups, many of which I am a member, is their failure to take on directly our type of capitalistic economic system which feels free to pollute and destroy the planet and is based on ever more consumption. These groups nibble around the edges but don’t want to offend any of their members by taking on the system.

Sooner or later the majority of the population may demand that we deal with climate change and all the other environmental issues we face. But will it be too late? Will we have passed so many tipping points so that we will not be able to stop the freight train of climate change, species loss, soil degradation, contamination of land and water, and the changing of the composition of our atmosphere?

I am asking you to take on the fight to preserve our biosphere and our species. I ask because I believe we have a moral obligation to posterity. The founding fathers often talked about posterity, but is something seldom heard from today’s politicians. They and our corporate leaders are only fixed on the next quarter’s profits and the latest stock market index. They only care about the accumulation of more wealth by the wealthy. A wealth accumulated by the exploitation of the planet and most of its people. Are we too comfortable with our life to take up this fight? Are we too concerned with the accumulation of more stuff? Are we too comfortable hiding in ignorance and denial?

I certainly don’t know the answers to questions for each individual, but it is clear where most of in our society stand. Unless there is a general demand from the population for action to protect our grandchildren and their grandchildren, our political leaders won’t act. They are too wedded to the powerful who are consumed with their wealth and power.

Edward Everett Hale wrote “I am only one, but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still I can do something; and because I cannot do everything I will not refuse to do the something that I can do. ” Henry Thoreau wrote that we are a society of one, and so we can change our society of one now, we don’t have to wait for the whole society to change. So it is up to us to begin the change needed to protect the life of the planet and in so doing hope to change the society as a whole. We can take contentment in knowing that we have chosen to act, not in a selfish way, but in a way which is true and moral. We can think beyond ourselves and to those who will follow us.

To the deniers I leave you with a quote from Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a leader of the underground church in Nazi Germany. “Folly is a more dangerous enemy to the good than evil. One can protest against evil; it can be unmasked and, if need be, prevented by force. Evil always carries the seeds of its own destruction, as it makes people, at the least, uncomfortable. Against folly we have no defense. Neither protests nor force can touch it; reasoning is no use; facts that contradict personal prejudices can simply be disbelieved- indeed the fool can counter by criticizing them, and if they are undeniable, they can just be pushed aside as trivial exceptions. So the fool, as distinct from the scoundrel, is completely self-satisfied; in fact, he can easily become dangerous, as it does not take much to make him aggressive.”

Keystone XL: Pure Snake Oil

by

The Republicans are pushing hard to build the Keystone XL Pipeline, a project of TransCanada that would transport Canadian tar sands oil through the heart of America to the Gulf of Mexico.  Yesterday marks the tenth time that the Republican controlled House has sought to override the Obama Administration and push through the controversial project.

The pipeline project is controversial because it unleashes the tar sands oil which sits beneath an impressive stretch of boreal forests in western Canada.  The extraction of this oil, which is mixed with tar and sand, will result in the destruction of this forest..but that is just the beginning of the story.

The extraction process itself is more energy intensive than any other form of fossil fuel extraction because the oil must be separated from the tarry mixture of sand and clay. In fact, while conventional oil produces 25 units of energy for every unit of energy invested in extraction, tar sands only produces 5 barrels of oil per barrel of energy invested. [1]

The extraction process also requires a great deal of fresh water. In fact, for every barrel of oil produced from the tar sands, the industry requires between .4 and 3.1 barrels of water. [2]

But it doesn’t end there. Because the boreal forest will be destroyed (and much of the wildlife that inhabits it, by the way), it will no longer be able to capture carbon. Boreal forests store twice as much carbon than any other ecosystem on earth. [3]  The extraction of the tar sands will make it extremely difficult to curb the impacts of climate change as more carbon is released and less is captured.

In addition to carbon, the extraction of tar sands releases “large volumes of pollutants into the air” which will impact the health of surrounding communities. [4] Add to that a report that suggests the carcinogens released by the process have been grossly underestimated. [5]

Since pipelines are certainly not infallible, what happens when a spill occurs. Just imagine…as difficult as the tar sands are to extract is as difficult as they are to clean up when a pipeline spill occurs. We now know this by experience.

On March 29, 2013, residents of a small town in Arkansas became very aware of the hazards of tar sands when an Exxon Mobile pipeline burst and released over 200,000 gallons of the tarry substance into their community. Residents soon began to notice health related issues including nausea, respiratory problems, fatigue and throbbing headaches.  [6]

Not coincidentally, residents of Marshall, Michigan also reported these same symptoms after an Enbridge Energy pipeline released over 800,000 gallons of tar sands into the Kalamazoo River and Talmadge Creek. [7]

Long after the spill in Arkansas, the clean up continues and many residents still suffer from illnesses they feel are a result of the spill; many have moved away. Others banded together in a class action law suit against Exxon Mobil.

Pipeline spills are actually more common than Americans may think. Between 2008 and 2012,  U.S. pipelines (carrying primarily oil and natural gas) spilled more than 3.1 million gallons of hazardous liquids, on average, annually, according to data from the Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. These spills, which could be attributed most commonly to corrosion and equipment failure, resulted in at least $1.5 billion in property damage altogether.

The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund was created in 1990 to ensure that taxpayers are not wholly responsible for subsidizing the clean up of oil spills. The trust fund is funded through a per barrel excise tax, penalties on the industry as well as transfers from existing pollution funds.  However, a loop hole exists since the establishment of the fund which exempts tar sands from being taxed because it is not a conventional oil; therefore, energy corporations transporting tar sands do not contribute to the clean up fund. [8]

To make matters worse, Republicans in their November 2014 vote to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, defeated an amendment that would have ensured that TransCanada would contribute toward the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. [9]

The proposed pipeline would weave through prime agricultural lands in the midwest and threaten home grown food supplies as well as one of the world’s largest sources of ground water in the world – the Ogallala Aquifer. [10] The Aquifer provides freshwater for roughly one-fifth of the wheat, corn, cattle and cotton in the United States and is the primary water supply for at least 1.9 million people. [11]

Republicans say they are pushing Keystone for the jobs and for oil independence. But when you look closely, the number of permeant jobs is wildly over estimated. In fact, the U.S. State Department estimates only 35 permanent jobs as a result of the project. [12] Also, the fact that the oil could be easily exported from Louisiana and sold on the world market challenges the Republicans’ claims that the pipeline will serve to bring lower energy prices here in America.

Are the Republicans (and the few Democrats) in support of this project beholden to the American people or are they beholden to the fossil fuel industry that will profit from this endeavor?  Consider this: those who voted in favor of Keystone XL in November received six times more in oil and gas contributions than those who opposed the pipeline. [13]

The costs are much greater to all of us if this pipeline proceeds. This project threatens our air and water, our climate, our communities, our farmland, individual landowner rights through government takings…and for what? For a project that will do very little to benefit America.

Perhaps the more important question is at what point do we say enough is enough. Because much of the easy pickings has been picked through, the tar sands represent the future of oil development – more energy intense, harder on our environment and costlier. When will we say that it is time to move on to safer, cleaner, more affordable energy solutions? When will we stand up to the fossil fuel industry and our corrupted leaders and take control of our future?  When will we consider the future of our children and grandchildren in our decision-making?

And when will we recognize real snake oil salesmen when we meet them?

Endnotes

[1] Nuwear, Rachel. “Oil Sands Mining Uses Up Almost as Much Energy as It Produces”, Inside Climate News, February 9,  2013. Available online at http://insideclimatenews.org/news/ 20130219/oil-sands-mining-tar-sands-alberta-canada-energy-return-on-investment-eroi-natural-gas-in-situ-dilbit-bitumen.

[2] Struzik, Ed. “With Tar Sands Development, Growing Concern on Water Use”, Environment 360, Yale University, August 2013. Available online at http://e360.yale.edu/feature/with_tar_sands_ development_growing_concern_on_water_use/2672/.

[3] Carlson, Matt, M.Sc., Jeff Wells, PhD, Dina Robers, PhD.  “The Carbon the World Forgot”, Boreal Songbird Initiative, 2009. Available online at http://www.borealbirds.org/announcements/carbon-world-forgot.

[4] Pembina Institute. “Oil Sands: Air Pollution”. Available online at http://www.pembina.org/oil-sands/os101/air-pollution.

[5] RT.com “Toxic carcinogens from tar sands oil production underestimated – report'”, February 4, 2014. Available online at http://rt.com/usa/keystone-oil-emissions-carcinogens-650/.

[6] Caplan-Bricker, Nora. “This is What Happens when a Pipeline Bursts in Your Town”, New Republic (November 18, 2013). Available online at http://www.newrepublic.com/article/ 115624/exxon-oil-spill-arkansas-2013-how-pipeline-burst-mayflower

[7] Frosch, Dan. “Amid Pipeline Debate, Two Costly Cleanups Forever Change Towns”, The New York Times, August 10, 3013. Available online at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/11/us/amid-pipeline-debate-two-costly-cleanups-forever-change-towns.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

[8] RT.com “Arkansas oil spill: Exxon reacts to tax ‘loophole,’ pledges ‘to cover all costs'”, December 23, 2013. Available online at http://rt.com/usa/arkansas-spill-exxon-cleanup-244/.

[9] ProgressIllinois. “U.S. House Approves Keystone XL Pipeline Bill”, November 14, 2014. Available online at http://www.progressillinois.com/news/content/2014/11/14/us-house-approves-keystone-xl-pipeline-bill.

[10] Mufson, Steven. “Keystone XL pipeline may threaten aquifer that irrigates much of the central U.S.”, Washington Post, August 6, 2012. Available online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/keystone-xl-pipeline-may-threaten-aquifer-that-irrigates-much-of-the-central-us/2012/08/06/7bf0215c-d4db-11e1-a9e3-c5249ea531ca_story.html.

[11] Plumer, Brad. “How long before the Great Plains runs out of water?”, Washington Post. September, 12, 2013. Available online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/12/how-long-before-the-midwest-runs-out-of-water.

[12] U.S. Department of State. “Keystone XL Project: Draft Supplemental EIS”, March 2013. Available online at http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/documents/organization/205719.pdf.

[13] Bryner, Sarah. “Senate Keystone “Yea” Votes Took In Six Times More Oil & Gas Money Than Opponents”, OpenSecrets.org. November 19, 2014. Available online at http://www.opensecrets.org/ news/2014/11/senate-keystone-yea-votes-took-in-six-times-more-oil-gas-money-than-opponents.

Mass Extinction in Man’s Hands

by

We are now experiencing the sixth major extinction period on our planet. A fact confirmed by the scientific observation of the evidence.  A recent study by the World Wildlife Fund concluded that in the last 40 years alone, there has been a 52% loss invertebrate populations. Biologists estimate that extinction is now happening at least one hundred times faster than the natural rate and it may be as high as a thousand times faster. In a special report, the National Audubon Society has concluded that we will lose 314 bird species in North America by 2080 if current trends continue.

Many people, if they are aware at all of past mass extinction periods, think they occur rather suddenly. Even the fifth extinction period, which was caused by a meteor strike, didn’t happen overnight.  The greatest extinction period occurred during the Permian Period and was caused by massive volcanic eruptions in the area which is now Siberia. 95% of all life forms were lost in this period. In our human arrogance we forget that we are biological creatures totally dependent on a fully functioning biosphere. We are one of the creatures which will face extinction unless we get our act together.

Many scientists are now calling the present time in our earth’s history the Anthropocene because it is human activity which is the most dominate factor affecting the earth’s life and climate systems. The current extinction period has been set in motion by many factors: climate change, habitat destruction, consumerism, invasive species, an amoral economic system guided only by the quest profits, and over 80,000 chemicals in the environment. One species of vertebrates not in decline is the human species. These factors are all interconnected.

There is a considerable amount of evidence that human consumption of meat, dairy, and fish is the single most destructive of all human activities. Animal agriculture is the largest contributor to global warming, water pollution and depletion, habitat destruction, and erosion of our topsoil. Our over consumption of fish is putting over 70% of all fish stocks under threat.

Humans raise and kill 70 billion creatures for food each year which produce 89,000 pounds of waste each second. This amounts to 130 times more waste than human waste. Anyway you think about it, this is a lot of ….. stuff. Much of it ends up polluting our streams causing dead zones in places like the Chesapeake Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. While cow burps play their share in producing the powerful greenhouse gas methane, all of this waste makes its contribution. An especially egregious contributor to this waste problem are concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFO).

Animal agriculture makes the single largest use of the earth’s land area and the destruction of its soils and forests. 70% to 90% of grains raised in this country goes to feed animals. We could produce all the food we need with plants on far less land. Over grazing has transformed entire areas of rangeland with an estimated 700 million acres of destruction. Desertification is a world-wide problem. Our precious top soil is being washed and blown away. All the crops being grown for animal feed greatly increase pesticide an herbicide use. Livestock occupies 30% of the earth’s land mass. Slash and burn destruction of the rainforest to raise cattle is the leading cause of rainforest and species loss.

Not only is animal agriculture directly responsible for polluting water, it is also putting a tremendous strain on clean water resources. While we in the eastern part of the United States may not be conscious of the problem, the Western United States consists of much arid and semi-arid land. A great deal of the cattle raised in this country are raised in this area. The Colorado River is so over used that it never makes it to the sea. The vast Ogallala Aquifer is rapidly being drained mostly to grow feed for cattle. Vast quantities of water are needed to meet livestock’s direct needs, to grow crops to feed them, and to process and package. Each quarter pounder you eat requires 660 gallons of water.

There is a simple way to end this colossally destructive practice. Stop eating animal products!  We are morally responsible for the consequences of our behavior. We should consider the consequences of our decisions when it comes to our food choices. Willful ignorance and denial do not absolve one from that responsibility. We as individuals do not have to wait for society to change before we act because we each comprise a society of one. We are free to eat animal products, but freedom should be guided by responsibility.

Meat, dairy, and fish are such an ingrained part of our diets and everyday lives that changing from this destructive eating pattern may be difficult. Much of this pattern has been built on misinformation. The dairy, meat, and fish industries have long pushed the idea that meat and dairy should be part of a healthy diet. There is a great deal of evidence brings this into question. Many believe that we must eat meat to get needed protein, but we can get all the protein we need from a plant based diet. Beef cattle are natural vegetarians, yet produce all that meat. While giving up all animal products may require a great change, one can transition over time. Meatless Mondays are only a beginning, but it may be a way to start.

Many have come to the conclusion that if one wants to protect the planet for future generations, we must greatly reduce our use of animal agriculture. A change that will not happen overnight, but a change that will happen because of environmental destruction or a rational plan. We have the choice. The only question is if we are too selfish to make the change.

Free to poison, kill and make profits

by

Freedom is a greatly treasured ideal and it is not uncommon for people to demand their rights. But we seldom hear of people fighting for and demanding their responsibilities. Yet freedom without responsibility can be a very dangerous thing. With freedom comes built-in responsibilities. Free market capitalism is often promoted by business corporations and the politicians whom they “own” and influence through their contributions and lobbying. The two major political parties are both business parties with the Republican Party being a wholly owned subsidiary.

Barbara Kingsolver has written that “global commerce is driven by a single conviction: the inalienable right to earn a profit, regardless of the human costs.” Free market capitalism to these corporations means the right to poison our air and water with their pollution. They believe that their right to poison the environment takes precedence over our right to good public health. Since they are amoral entities and their only motivation is profit, they have no inhibition from damaging our health with their pollutants. If you don’t believe this is true, don’t they do all they can to weaken and defeat legislation and regulations to protect the environment? They do not want to take responsibility for their wastes which pollute or air and water.

We have made the decision as a society that our right to clean indoor air trumps the right of smokers to smoke in public places. Why shouldn’t we air breathers have the same rights to breathe unpolluted air in the atmosphere which surrounds us? Why shouldn’t corporations be held to same standards that we apply to smokers? This doesn’t mean that businesses don’t have a right to make a profit, they just can’t dump their costs on the rest of us. In very simple terms, they should not be allowed to profit by poisoning us.

While our current environmental laws and regulations are inadequate to do the job, the laws, regulations, and agencies that protect our air and water are under constant attack from the political right. They put profit ahead of human and environmental health. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), even with all his shortcomings in protecting the environment, is under constant attack. As an example, our two local Congressmen, Representatives Marino and Barletta, just recently voted to weaken the EPA. These men and their fellow right wing travelers believe that corporation’s “right” to poison us and make us ill trumps our right to a clean environment and good health. While I’m sure they both would deny this accusation, their voting records clearly demonstrate the veracity of this charge. The EPA’s was created to protect public health, not promote corporate profits.

Business corporations have a right to make a profit, but the right to make a profit entails many responsibilities. They must be responsible that in making their profits they do not externalize their costs to us and the environment. We have the responsibility to protect our health and the health of our children and grandchildren by demanding that corporations are not free to dump their wastes on all us. We have the responsibility to demand that our government fulfill its duty of protecting us. While the polluters and their political handmaidens like Representatives Marino and Barletta always use the “jobs” argument, can they tell us how many jobs are equivalent to a sick child? Don’t they know that many jobs will be created by fashioning a cleaner world for all of us?