Frances Beinecke's Blog: Moving Beyond Oil

Voice Off the Bayou

2010-05-14T22:06:42Z

Derrick Evans squinted into the sunlight glaring off the brackish water of Grand Bayou, an hour's drive south of New Orleans, filled his lungs with the pungent air of the fertile delta wetlands, and gazed off toward the Gulf of Mexico.

A mile away lay the leading edge of 4 million gallons of crude oil, its toxic film lying in wait like some predatory pall bearing down upon the verdant marsh and its rich bounty of shrimp, oysters, fish and birds.

"The reason there's so much oil out there is because there has always been so much life here," said Evans, a history teacher pondering the origins of petroleum reaching back 300 million years.

"The same forces that made this America's wetlands made the area America's carbon graveyard," he said last week. "Maybe there's a reason why native Americans say don't mess with burial sites."

A big man with a voice that rises like thunder across the bayou, Evans has a gift for tying the past to the present with a literary bow finished off with ironic twists.

In the weeks since a BP oil rig sank and began spewing crude oil into the sea, he's emerged as a powerful and eloquent advocate for tens of thousands of Gulf Coast families whose lives are tied to the water.

"We don't have a lot of money," he told me. "The capital that we do have, and use to the best of our ability, is our relationships and our stories. We didn't know the next chapter was going to include this."

The Gulf oil spill has the potential to become the most catastrophic economic and environmental disaster to hit this region since Hurricane Katrina roared through five years ago.

Still reeling from Katrina and scarred by a federal response so inept that it shocked the world, Evans and those he speaks for are bracing for another punishing round of setback and loss.

"We are a people in constant disaster," Evans intoned as if quoting Scripture. "We don't get to recover from one before another hits. It's almost like a book of Job that doesn't end."

Evans is an advisor to the Gulf Coast Fund for Community Renewal and Economic Health, a project of the Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.

After touring Grand Bayou in an oyster boat last week, he hosted a meeting of other Gulf Coast Fund participants and community activists last in Biloxi, Miss. There, he and his peers spoke clearly and directly about what they need most.

First, he said, they need authoritative information about the risks to health and livelihood. Who is monitoring air and water quality, asks Evans, how are those results being shared and what do they mean to the daily lives and decisions being made by families who live here?

They need help, also, in documenting losses and applying for disaster assistance, a nightmare in the Katrina aftermath, which was harder than it had to be for many Gulf people simply because they couldn't demonstrate hardship in accordance with federal requirements.

They need help in navigating the morass of legal issues raised when people who make ends meet from one catch to the next find the waters they've worked for generations poisoned by corporate forces they can't control. They may well need litigation assistance to ensure that those who caused the damage pick up the tab.

"I want to know what the community might need in terms of legal support and capacity," said John Jopling, senior staff attorney with the Mississippi Center for Justice.

Finally, and perhaps most enduringly, they need help in advocating for the big-picture change in U.S. energy policy that can strike a new balance between the nation's need for fuel and power and the delicate and complex Gulf Coast environment of oceans, coastline, estuaries and marsh.

The American people - across the Gulf Coast and across the country - need a clean energy future that will move us away from our increasingly dangerous dependence on oil and toward the sustainable and renewable power sources of tomorrow.

Legislation that takes a step in the right direction was unveiled this week in the Senate, but it will take leadership from President Obama for the bill to be strengthened and to succeed.

This is a national imperative. We owe it to our children; we owe it to ourselves.

And yet, as the people of the Gulf Coast gird themselves for the brunt of a catastrophic oil spill, it is here, in a voice off the bayou, I heard the case for change made loud and clear.

"This is really just the beginning of the first part of this disaster," warned Evans. "When you separate man's experience from nature, you're doomed."

Gulf Oil Rig Disaster: Perspectives from in the air and on the ground

2010-05-12T23:06:02Z

High over the Gulf of Mexico, I looked down in horror and sadness Wednesday at the site of the massive BP oil spill.

Clear blue waters were streaked with rivers of crude oil, a thick brown stew of petroleum toxics streaming unchecked toward the open sea.

A thinner but still poisonous sheen coated the surface with a curd-like film as far as the eye could see.

"Off to the right," my helicopter pilot, Ted Grove said, tilting slightly to open my view to dark red plumes of oil, stretching for miles from the site where the BP oil rig sank April 22 after an explosion two days before.

Since then, more than 4 million gallons of crude oil have gushed into the fertile Gulf, threatening marine life and bearing down on the rich coastal waters, beaches and wetlands some 40 miles to the north.

As we circled the site, I felt I was looking down on some seaborne disaster area, as, indeed, I was.

There were some three dozen ships working within an area of perhaps 20 square miles or so.

I counted eight skimmers trolling the waters corralling the thick crude near the center of the site.

Close by, huge fountains of ~~water~~ fluid gushed from a pair of ships -- spraying dispersant directly at the spill site, according to the Deepwater Horizon Incident Joint Information Center.

A ship with an enormous industrial-style crane was on site -- apparently in connection with the "top hat" BP was hoping to deploy to try to stem the flow of oil.

And there were tenders working the underwater robotic vehicles prowling the deep water below in search of a solution to the raging spill.

We can only hope -- and pray -- for their success.

What took my breath away, though, was the extent of the calamity unfolding in the Gulf.

The skimmers are a help, and the dispersant will chemically break apart ~~down~~ the oil into smaller globs. Some of the crude will evaporate in the warm Gulf air. [ed note: The dispersant doesn't chemically degrade the oil itself.]

The oil, though, is there, and the pollution with it -- in the ocean, in the air, and headed, inevitably, toward the shallow coastal waters and fertile wetlands and shore.

We can struggle to contain it -- as many were clearly doing on Wednesday and have done for weeks. But we can't put it back in the well.

That's why we need to find out what caused this terrible accident, what we must do to prevent anything like this from ever happening again and what we can do to hold BP accountable for the terrible cost this disaster has already begun to exact from the region.

I was reminded of those costs as we flew back toward shore. I saw hundreds of miles of coastal wetlands and waterways, essential habitat for shrimp, oysters, fish and birds.

I recalled the voices of oystermen, fishermen, shrimpers and others I visited with Tuesday on the bayou below, the Gulf Coast community activists I'd met with in Biloxi, Miss., and the environmental justice experts I'd listened to in nearby New Orleans.

As this oil creeps over the ocean it is suffocating not only habitat and wildlife but also the livelihood and way of life for thousands of Gulf Coast residents.

The people of this region are a resilient lot. This, though, has them scared.

They are untrusting of BP. They are worried about their health. They are frightened for their future and their families.

We need to do better in this country.

We need to begin the long process of reducing our reliance on oil and increasing our use of renewable and sustainable fuels.

As I was flying over the Gulf of Mexico, the despair of Gulf people mirrored in the terrifying glaze of oil moving menacingly over the sea, Senators John Kerry of Massachusetts and Joe Lieberman of Connecticut were unveiling legislation that can help.

It isn't perfect legislation. There is much to improve. As I flew over those wounded waters today, though, I felt hopeful that this legislation can begin that process. Now, let's move it forward.

Clean Energy Bill Released: Now It’s Time for Leadership

2010-05-12T18:20:54Z

Today, Senator Kerry and Senator Lieberman released comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation. The bill provides a good starting point, and we look forward to working with Senator Majority Leader Reid and President Obama to build on this foundation without delay to deliver legislation that puts Americans back to work, reduces our dependence on oil, and creates a healthier future for our children.

We need that legislation now more than ever. As the Deepwater Horizon disaster continues to unfold with tragic consequences, it has become painfully clear that America needs a safer, cleaner approach to energy development. Congress must enact a comprehensive clean energy and climate bill this year that puts America back in control of our energy situation.

This draft legislation gets us moving in the right direction.

It is too soon to say where NRDC stands on every aspect of the bill. As I write this, NRDC experts are combing through the document, and I imagine they will discover things in it that NRDC likes and things we don’t. Here's where we stand on what we've seen so far.

The bill’s core carbon pollution limits are solid. These emission limits get tighter every year and will drive investments in clean energy that create jobs, cut pollution, and end our addiction to oil from dangerous locations, both offshore and overseas.
The bill would be more effective if its overall pollution limits were backed up by minimum performance standards for the largest polluters. We will work to strengthen the bill to preserve more of the Clean Air Act's proven approach to cutting air pollution.
The bill must not create incentives for offshore oil drilling or push forward drilling before we understand the risks involved for specific areas. The current Presidential moratorium does not go far enough, and does not, for example, stop the drilling planned for this summer in Alaska.
The subsidies for nuclear power in the draft bill are excessive and the proposed weakening of safety and environmental licensing reviews is ill-advised. NRDC will oppose these provisions.
The energy efficiency and forest protection provisions should be more robust, and NRDC will work to strengthen these provisions as the process moves forward.

Senators Kerry and Lieberman have done a remarkable job of building the foundation for clean energy and climate action and overall, I believe the bill is a good start. But to realize the promise of the bill, we need leadership from the top.

We need President Obama and Majority Leader Reid to guide a process that brings Senators of good will from both sides of the aisle together around a comprehensive clean energy and climate bill--one that draws on the best elements of this bill as well as other proposals so the Senate can pass effective legislation without delay.

This is the kind of solution Americans are looking for. According to a new poll conducted by Belden, Russonello & Stewart for NRDC, seven in ten American say it’s time to fast-track clean energy legislation that begins to break our dangerous addiction to oil by increasing our use of sustainable and renewable power and fuels.

NRDC will work to build on today’s proposal to achieves these clean energy results. Done right, a comprehensive bill could create nearly 2 million jobs for American workers-- good-paying jobs coast to coast that can't be shipped overseas.

It could slash our reliance on dirty oil, thereby protecting marine life and coastal communities from future offshore oil disasters. It could position America to dominate the global clean energy market, which is expected to attract $230 billion in annual investment by 2020. And it will strike a blow against the most pressing environmental challenge of our time --climate change.

By promoting the development of the next generation of energy efficient cars, homes and workplaces, this legislation will put us, as a nation, back on track for growth.

But we need our leaders to pass the bill this year, so that Americans can start reaping these rewards as soon as possible.

Flying over the Oil Spill, Hearing about the Response Effort

2010-05-11T16:36:12Z

Yesterday I arrived in New Orleans to join NRDC’s on-the-ground team and see firsthand the impacts of the massive and still-uncontrolled, still-flowing oil spill from Deepwater Horizon. Quickly we head up and over the wetlands in a helicopter, and the impression I got throughout the flight, from takeoff to landing, is that the coast of Louisiana is the work horse for the oil and gas industry.

The wetlands were emerald colored, snow-white egrets flew against the lush green and a bald eagle flew by as we skimmed across the Delta heading for the open water. Wildlife abounded: one island was covered with brown pelicans, a nesting area for thousands.

Yet evidence of the industry marred the natural landscape everywhere: jack boats, well heads, helicopter pads, and service boats heading further out. We saw channels dredged for pipelines and oil tanks sitting on higher ground.

And down below, we watched the latest industrial scars in the water, seeing variations in the color and texture and mixing of oily tendrils flowing with the currents further and further to the west. We were tracking a NOAA map of where some of the oil had floated west of the accident site, nearly 100 miles west.

This oil had traveled far and was still moving, mixing into the water column, dispersing into the air, on a journey with unpredictable consequences to coastal and marine life and those whose livelihoods depend on it.

Our flyover revealed the scale of the spill and the immense area now at risk. The damage here is likely to be severe, and the full extent remains unknown. What we do know is that within this expanse we’re looking down upon – many people's livelihoods are at-risk. It’s for this reason that everyone here is worried. That much is clear the moment you touch down in the region.

And we know many species here are in danger. NRDC's marine and wildlife experts have described the threatened species in their blogs: the birds, turtles and marine mammals, the fish including the bluefin tuna that spawn here. Noted fisheries biologist Daniel Pauly has a new audio slideshow at OnEarth reminding us that the phytoplankton and zooplankton--the food chain itself--is also at risk from the oil.

After our flight, we headed over to the Coast Guard Command Center to meet with Admiral Mary Landry and representatives from NOAA, MMS and BP. Although we didn't meet with the EPA, Administrator Jackson is on the ground this week, as citizens share their concerns about the impact of dispersants, air quality issues, and what health risks go along with massive amounts of petroleum being released into the environment.

This oil spill is massive, and so is the response effort. It is designed to do three things.

1. Secure the source. As everyone watching the news knows, this is an ongoing effort--and not yet successful. Doug Suttles, BP’s chief operating officer for exploration and production, described to us the containment efforts, ranging from the vessel they tried to place over the weekend to the smaller "top hat" with a pipe attached that they are attempting to place now, to a "junk shot" where they try to stop the flow by plugging the well, to the relief well that will take up to 90 days to complete. All these efforts will happen concurrently.

2. Contain the oil. What was clear from these conversations is that everyone involved in the cleanup effort is doing a lot of on-the-ground learning. The scale, depth, and distance of this spill make it unique. Placing 1 million feet of booms, burning the oil, using dispersants, and skimming are all efforts to reduce the damage. The guiding principal is to protect resources at greatest risk. One action may benefit one resource while harming another. Dispersants may be the best hope to prevent oil from reaching shore and coating critical wetlands habitat and wildlife species. But what could be happening in the water column itself is another matter, one little understood. NOAA provides its scientific expertise and judgment to the Coast Guard, MMS and BP as each action is taken. It's a balancing act--that much was clear.

3. Foster recovery. A separate division at NOAA is already beginning to plan that effort.

In between our flight and the conversations with officials, I have been placing calls to Washington, working to ensure that clean energy and climate legislation is just that--a new energy pathway that ensures we will not again experience anything like the Deepwater Horizon blow out.

Photos taken by NRDC, click for captions and more photos

Fuel Efficiency and the False Choice between Coastal Safety and Oil Supply

2010-05-10T16:04:47Z

This morning, I am traveling to Louisiana to see for myself what the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster has done to this bountiful but deeply stressed region. I am going to meet with local environmental justice groups in New Orleans and talk with fishermen and biologists along the coast.

I want to hear what Louisianans have to say about this disaster, because they and their Gulf Coast neighbors are paying a very steep price for America’s failed energy policies.

In the days since the spill, some lawmakers have given Americans a false choice. They claim we must either drill for more oil offshore or import more oil from foreign regimes.

They refuse to talk about the other option: fuel efficiency.

We don’t have to risk American lives--either on dangerous offshore rigs at home or on frontlines in the Middle East--to power our cars and trucks. Making engines run farther on less fuel is the cheapest, safest, and cleanest choice we have.

Earlier this spring, President Obama announced cleaner car standards that will increase the fuel efficiency of America’s vehicles. By 2030, those standards will save 10.2 billion barrels of oil--that’s more oil than is included in the entire offshore area President Obama opened to drilling in March.

If we passed more comprehensive efficiency standards--including heavy-duty trucks, airplanes, and home-heating oil--by 2030 we could save approximately 26.5 billion barrels of oil more than the new offshore drilling areas contain.

We could even take a more efficient approach to domestic oil wells. Enhanced oil recovery from existing fields could supply more than 10 times the amount of oil that could be produced by drilling in our oceans over the same period.

These are some of the facts I will share with people I meet in Louisiana, because they are the ones suffering the consequences of America’s limited view of energy resources.

We don’t have to accept this disaster or believe it is the price we pay for filling up our gas tanks. We can demand our lawmakers pass clean energy and climate legislation that will make fuel-efficient engines and plug-in hybrids commonplace and slash our reliance on oil.

A new, clean energy policy is the best choice we have for protecting the Gulf of Mexico and all other coastal communities around our nation.

After 2 Carbon Disasters in 1 Month, Time for Clean Energy

2010-05-09T00:29:14Z

America has experienced two energy-related disasters in the past month, and though they involved different technologies and occurred in different parts of the country, they had one thing in common: fossil fuels.

On April 5, a massive accident at the Upper Big Branch coal mine in West Virginia killed 29 people and injured 2 others.

On April 20, the explosion at the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico killed 11 people and continues to send 20,000 gallons of oil into the Gulf every day.

The mine collapse and oil explosion follow on the heels of the third catastrophe, the massive coal ash spill when a dam near a Tennessee Valley Authority power plant in Kingston, Tennessee burst in December, 2008, spreading coal waste ash and sludge into nearby homes and farmlands.

These tragic incidents illustrate in vivid detail the tremendous, usually hidden cost of our addiction to dirty carbon energy sources and why Congress must adopt comprehensive climate and energy legislation. Such legislation will unleash clean energy, encourage energy efficiency and reduce our dependence on coal and oil.

Cleaner technologies already exist that can free us from the hazards of America’s energy policy. Because the most alarming thing about April’s fossil fuel disasters is that they are not unique. There is a pattern here.

The Santa Barbara and Exxon Valdez oil spills are well known, but there are plenty of recent incidents as well. In the fall of 2009, a massive oil spill occurred off the coast of Australia at a supposedly state-of-the-art facility. The spill ultimately dumped tens of thousands of gallons of oil, covering over 20,000 square miles of sea, and taking 10 weeks to bring under control.

In September 2008, Hurricane Ike destroyed oil platforms, tanks, and pipelines throughout the Gulf of Mexico, releasing at least a half million gallons of crude oil. Previously, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused 125 spills from platforms, rigs, and pipelines in the OCS, releasing almost 685,000 gallons of petroleum products.

The impacts of such spills are long-term. According to the National Academy of Sciences, current cleanup methods can only remove a small fraction of the oil spilled into the ocean, leaving the remaining oil to continue affecting ocean ecosystems over time.

Coal mining casts a similarly long shadow over Appalachia. While mining fatalities have declined to a yearly average of 30 deaths, the culture of lax safety regulation and environmental enforcement has put miners’ lives and mining communities at risk.

Mining companies are clear cutting thousands of acres of some of the world's most biologically diverse forests. They're filling local rivers and streams with blasted debris, polluting drinking water with toxic waste. MTR coal mining sites, which can exceed 10 square miles, have already leveled more than 470 summits so far.

And these are just the visible hazards of fossil fuel extraction. As Paul Krugman recently pointed out in the New York Times, the one we can’t see may be the most dangerous: the global warming pollution released when we burn oil and coal. This pollution will lead not only to extreme and costly weather events, but also greater civil unrest and forced migration around the globe, according to the Pentagon and CIA.

We don’t have to sacrifice the Gulf of Mexico, the mountains of Appalachia, or the well-being of fellow human beings in order to power our economy.

More fuel-efficient cars and plug-in hybrids, better rail and public transit can slash our need for oil, while more energy efficient buildings and renewable power can reduce our need for coal plants.

These are the technologies that will put Americans to work, protect our coastal fishing and tourism industries, and preserve marine life and mountains from fossil fuel extraction.

Three Steps Obama Should Take to Prevent Future Oil Disasters

2010-05-04T22:11:46Z

As tragedy in the Gulf of Mexico continues to unfold in painful and unpredictable ways, Americans are wondering what we can do to prevent another offshore oil disaster in the future.

I have just sent a letter to President Obama outlining NRDC’s recommendations for how we can protect marine life and coastal communities from similar spills in the Gulf or elsewhere.

TAKE ACTION: Tell President Obama to Impose a Moratorium on New Offshore Drilling

The best protection we have against offshore accidents is to end our dependence on oil. We simply don’t have to jeopardize our oceans, fishing industry, tourism business, and rich coastal ecosystems in order to fuel our cars and trucks. We can pass clean energy and climate legislation--legislation that will slash our oil reliance by spurring innovation in cleaner solutions--things like more efficient cars and plug-in hybrids.

But even as we begin the shift to clean energy, America’s oil exploration policy must be thoroughly reviewed and reconsidered in light of the startling new facts on the ground.

Here are there steps the Obama Administration can take right now in order to protect marine life and coastal communities from future offshore oil disasters.

1. Impose a moratorium on all new offshore oil drilling activities. Existing plans to move ahead with offshore drilling were based on the assumption that the likelihood of a serious spill was virtually too remote to contemplate. The catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico has shattered that assumption.

America should halt new offshore leasing, exploratory drilling, and seismic exploration, including the exploratory drilling that is scheduled to begin in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas in Alaska this summer. The moratorium should remain in effect until the causes of the current spill and their ramifications are fully understood.

2. Ensure rules for future drilling reflect the lessons of Deepwater Horizon. Obama administration should immediately suspend the processes for opening up new offshore areas to drilling. The processes now underway will set the ground rules for future drilling. For those ground rules to make any sense, they would have to be designed to prevent a spill like the one in the Gulf of Mexico from recurring. But no one yet knows how to do that.

Before comments are due and decisions are made on how to proceed, the American people--and the administration--should have a full understanding of the causes and impacts of the Gulf of Mexico spill. The planning process could resume when the ground rules for future drilling could reflect what is learned from the current tragedy.

3. Initiate an independent investigation. In order to fully understand the demise of the Deepwater Horizon, the ensuing spill and its ramifications, the administration must launch an independent investigation staffed by experts who do not work for the government or the oil industry. It should assess the causes of the current spill, how such spills can be avoided in the future, the adequacy of containment and clean-up measures for spills generally, and the implications of these findings for drilling in or near sensitive or ecologically important areas.

The experts should issue recommendations on how to strengthen regulations to prevent spills and to protect sensitive and ecologically important areas. They should also propose criteria to determine whether areas should be excluded from leasing. The moratorium and suspensions called for above should not be lifted before the investigation has been completed.

These three steps would help ensure that the lessons of this disaster can be used to reform drilling policy. While the situation remains fluid, it is already clear that the status quo cannot adequately protect the public. Simply continuing along based on assumptions that have now been disproven should not be an option.

Say no to offshore drilling. Take action and Tell President Obama to Impose a Moratorium on New Offshore Drilling

Which Would You Choose: Offshore Wind or Offshore Oil?

2010-05-03T16:12:22Z

Like all Americans, I am sickened by the news coming from the Gulf of Mexico. The oil spill is now 100 miles long and is moving toward the Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida coastlines.

As I watch coverage of the devastation, I am reminded of another energy story from last week: the approval of the Cape Wind offshore wind farm in the Nantucket Sound.

What a contrast these two energy projects make: The dirty, hazardous fuel that can swamp local communities versus the clean, sustainable energy that doesn’t spill.

If I were an official in a coastal state, I know which one I would choose. I would reject President Obama’s plan for more offshore oil drilling and I would invest in renewable offshore projects that wouldn’t harm my state.

I realize that oil and gas drilling has brought jobs and income to the state of Louisiana. It has helped fuel the state’s economy, but it is painfully clear that it also brings real risk.

Louisiana is home to 40 percent of America’s wetlands. Over the years, the oil support infrastructure has eaten away at those wetlands, with more and more being dredged to support offshore oil. I saw the erosion of the wetlands and coastal barriers first hand when I visited the region after Katrina. There have been cries to restore the wetlands for years, yet now another devastating blow has landed on one of the richest ecosystems in the nation.

The economy will suffer along with the ecosystem. A 2006 report found that the U.S. commercial fishing industry generated more than $103 billion in sales, provided $44.3 billion in income, and supported more than 1.5 million jobs. But these are jobs that rely on clean water and healthy fish--not oil slicks.

Fishermen in the Gulf know their livelihood is at stake. The State of Louisiana opened shrimp season early on Thursday in an effort to let shrimpers harvest as much as possible, but by Sunday, the federal government ordered a halt to all fishing in the oil-slick region due to public safety concerns. Fishermen who struggled to rebuild their business after Hurricane Katrina are worried they won’t rebound after this. Several Louisiana shrimpers have filed a class action lawsuit against BP, the owners of the oil rig, and its contractor Halliburton, for endangering their income.

There is, of course, yet another hazard that comes from a heavily reliance on offshore drilling: 900 pounds of carbon dioxide pollution for each barrel of oil we burn. While not as visible as the impact of the oil spill, carbon pollution could be just as devastating to Louisiana. Global warming could inundate Louisiana’s wetlands as sea levels rise and hurricanes become more ferocious. In the ocean, carbon dioxide becomes an acid that could make it impossible for Louisiana’s oysters and crabs to build the shells they need to reproduce.

In contrast, offshore wind farms do not pollute the water, air, or local communities. These renewable projects--which could provide power for plug-in hybrid cars--have a track record of success and reliability.

I recently blogged about my trip to offshore wind farms in Denmark, which generates 20 percent of its electricity from wind. At first, people living in nearby coastal towns were concerned that the wind farms would hurt their vibrant tourism and marina businesses. Yet that never came to pass.

Now, the mayor of one of the town’s told me, “We look back and wonder what we were so worried about.”

Sadly, that cannot be said for the communities along the Gulf of Mexico that are about to be turned upside down by the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

As we watch the horrific spectacle of yet another oil spill ravage our waters, our wildlife, our fishing and tourism industries, we must ask, once again: what will it take to get our leaders to act?

We must pass a clean energy and climate bill that is designed to prevent tragedies like this in the future--legislation that will shift America away from oil, toward cleaner and renewable sources that can’t poison our coasts. The work has begun. It must move ahead now.

Tell the Senate to Get Its Job Done--Pass the Climate Bill Now

2010-04-30T15:49:10Z

The clean energy and climate bill drafted by Senators Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman remains stuck in limbo. After all the careful drafting and negotiations the senators conducted, the bill has been slowed by Washington politics.

This stalling has to stop. Too much is at stake and the finish line is too close to let a cleaner, more prosperous future slip away.

There is a real danger here that we could lose an historic opportunity and all the vital benefits that would come with it--nearly 2 million jobs that will help American families, cleaner cars and fuels that will cut oil imports in half, and climate solutions that will address the biggest environmental and humanitarian crisis of our age.

The time has come to move into the future, not remain stuck in the past, and Americans from all walks of life agree. In the past few days, business executives, labor unions, religious groups, and environmental organizations have said loud and clear that they want our lawmakers to pass a clean energy and climate bill now.

I believe our leaders are listening. On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said:

"Immigration, energy are equally vital to our economic and national security. And we've ignored both of them for far too long. I'm committed to doing both this session of Congress … Common sense dictates that if you have a bill that's ready to go, that's the one I'm going to go to … the energy bill is ready."

But we have to make sure Senators and the White House hear how urgent this bill is. More delay will hurt America--and help our rivals.

Stalling this bill makes climate change impacts worse. This week, the EPA released a report confirming that global warming is already hitting America: 7 of the top 10 warmest years on record and 8 of the top 10 years for extreme one-day precipitation events have occurred since 1990 (you can see some of the startling graphs here). These trends will continue unless low-carbon technologies are put in place now.

Stalling this bill helps China’s economy, not ours. On Wednesday, Tom Friedman wrote that people were high-fiving in Beijing this week because the Senate’s failure to pass a clean energy and climate bill means China can dominate the global clean energy market, which is expected to attract $230 billion in annual investment by 2020.

Stalling this bill helps Iran and other regimes that support extremists. If the Senate fails to pass clean energy and climate legislation, Iran alone will earn an extra $100 million per day on average from higher oil prices.

It doesn’t have to be this way. You can urge your senators to get clean energy and climate legislation back on track by clicking here.

President Obama also has a critical role to play. Last week, I stood in the Rose Garden and heard the president call for a clean energy and climate bill.

Now that the bill has slowed down, it is time for President Obama to step in to stop the finger pointing, and bring people together to get this done this year.

America can’t wait any longer--we NEED a comprehensive clean energy and climate bill now.

EPA's New Clean Car Standards: The Right Kind of Energy Solution

2010-04-01T20:57:19Z

America took a major step forward in our efforts to fight climate change on Thursday. The Environmental Protection Agency finalized new clean car standards that will slash greenhouse gas pollution from cars, minivans, and pickup trucks.

President Obama queued up this announcement yesterday in his address at Andrews Air Force Base, but it was largely drowned out by news of the administration’s misguided offshore drilling policy.

But these standard are precisely the kind of clean energy solution we need right now. Not only will they save consumers an estimated $65 billion at the pump in 2020, but they will also cut oil consumption by 1.3 million barrels of oil a day and slash global warming pollution by more than 220 million metric tons in the year 2020 alone.

That is equivalent to taking 38 million cars off the road for a year.

Think about it. That is 1.3 million barrels of oil we won’t have to extract from unspoiled landscapes or ocean ecosystems. It is 1.3 million barrels of oil we won’t have to import from unstable regimes. It is 1.3 million barrels of oil we won’t have send our troops to fight for.

President Obama entered office saying he would reduce America’s oil addiction and today he is delivering on that promise. Yet this is only the beginning. We can save even more oil--and create nearly 2 million jobs in the process--but passing a comprehensive clean energy and climate bill. This legislation will unleash even more oil-saving technologies for our cars and trucks.

As we fight hard to pass this bill in the Senate, I am proud to say that NRDC played a central role in establishing the new clean car standards announced on Thursday. We helped draft the original standards in California, we defended them in court when automakers tried to block them, and we helped broker the “Clean Car Peace Treaty” that led to Thursday’s announcement.

Now we are bringing the same relentless approach to the climate fight, as we can help generate more clean energy solutions.

Obama Goes Forward on Clean Cars, Backward on Offshore Drilling

2010-03-31T20:02:45Z

President Obama traveled to Andrews Air Force Base today to talk about the need to strengthen America’s energy security. I agreed with his emphasis on the need to invest in clean energy. I welcomed his mention of the new clean car standards for cars that will be formally announced tomorrow.

But I do not support his decision to open vast areas of our oceans to offshore drilling. Protecting coastal communities was one of the first things I worked on as an environmentalist, and for 30 years I have fought for sound ocean policies. Expanding offshore drilling will take us backward, not forward.

Spending time and money on dirty, 19th century fuels is a move in the wrong direction, especially since President Obama said today:

“Drilling alone cannot come close to meeting our long-term energy needs, and that for the safe of the planet and our energy independence, we need to begin the transition to cleaner fuels now.”

The new clean car standards President Obama is establishing are the kind of solution we need right now--the kind that will get us moving into the 21st century.

As Obama pointed out, these new standards will not only save drivers money, but will also save 1.8 billion barrels of oil. That is the equivalent of taking 58 million cars off the road for a year.

If we want to boost our domestic oil supply, we should focus on enhanced oil recovery from existing fields, a process that can supply more than 10 times the amount of oil that could be produced by drilling in our oceans over the same period.

Turning back the clock and returning to more offshore drilling, meanwhile, will do little to relieve America’s oil addiction.

According to the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration, drilling in America’s previously closed ocean areas “would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production…before 2030.” Even then, “because oil prices are determined on the international market …any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.”

Offshore drilling would yield little cost or supply benefit, and yet it would pose serious long-term danger to our beaches and marine life. It also threatens commercial fishing, ocean-related tourism, and recreation industries that contributed more than $128 billion to the nation’s economy in 2004 and supported more than 2 million jobs.

As our economy falters and climate change continues unchecked, we should be preserving the jobs we have and investing in the clean energy technologies, which studies show, generate three times as many jobs as if the same amount were invested in the oil and gas industry.

If the administration proceeds with offshore drilling, NRDC will fight to make sure the strongest environmental standards are put in place. Those include making science-based assessments to identify fragile areas that must be set off-limits, placing no-drill buffers around parks and other sensitive areas, and requiring the use of the best available technology.

I agree with President Obama that we need to transition to cleaner fuels now. And I applaud the U.S. military’s efforts to confront the twin challenges of oil addiction and climate change.

But sinking more drill pads into our oceans is not the answer. Not when better running cars and more efficient use of existing oil fields can transition us to the 21st century without harming marine life or marine jobs.

Climate Change "Pervasive, Wide-Ranging" White House Task Force Reports

2010-03-17T21:49:38Z

Climate change is already having "pervasive, wide-ranging" effects on "nearly every aspect of our society," a task force representing more than 20 federal agencies reported Tuesday.

"These impacts will influence how and where we live and work as well as our cultures, health and environment," the report states. "It is therefore imperative to take action now to adapt to a changing climate."

Indeed, climate change has begun to affect the ability of government agencies to fulfill their missions, reports the White House Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force.

The group is led by the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

It is made up of representatives from more than 20 federal agencies, departments and offices, including the Department of Commerce, the National Intelligence Council, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Pentagon. That's diverse - and it's definitive.

President Obama convened the task force in October, directing it to look into whether climate change was affecting the United States and, if so, what might be done about it.

On Tuesday, the group issued preliminary findings. As to the question of whether climate change is impacting our country, the report is emphatic.

"The Task Force has found that climate change is affecting, and will continue to affect, nearly every aspect of our society and the environment," the report states. "Some of the impacts are increased severity of floods, droughts, and heat waves, increased wildfires and sea level rise.

"Climate change impacts are pervasive, wide-ranging and affect the core systems of our society: transportation, ecosystems, agriculture, business, infrastructure, water, and energy, among others," the report continues. "Climate change already is affecting the ability of Federal agencies to fulfill their missions."

Strong stuff.

When reports like this come out of a White House task force, each word is parsed, discussed and vetted by all participants. It's a consensus document, meaning it reflects the view of the group as a whole. That makes writing the report a challenge, but it ensures authenticity and weight.

Those are two things notably lacking from the raft of climate change deniers who have been having a field day of late trying to rally an assault on science with a handful of stolen e-mails and a couple of minor errors in a 2,800-page report by the International Panel on Climate Change.

These same critics will likely try to paint the task force report in partisan terms. In fact, it relies on sound science developed over two decades through four administrations – two of them Republican, and two Democratic.

The White House task force tells us the truth. Our climate is changing, and it's affecting our country in fundamental ways.

One reason is that U.S. smokestacks and tailpipes will dump roughly 6 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the Earth's atmosphere this year alone. That's nearly one-fifth of the world total of this heat-trapping pollution.

We can do better.

The clean energy and climate legislation being drafted in the Senate can put us on the path to curbing carbon pollution. It can put Americans back to work building the next generation of energy-efficient cars, homes and workplaces. And it can make our country more secure by cutting our dependence on foreign oil in half. It needs and deserves our support.

I look forward to October, when the task force issues its final report.

A few things, though, are already clear. Climate change is happening, right here, right now. It threatens our future, our children, our way of life. It's time we face the facts and deal with what's happening right before our eyes – before it’s too late.

Join Bobby Kennedy Jr. and Me at a New York City Town Hall

2009-11-16T18:31:21Z

Tomorrow night I have the honor of introducing Bobby Kennedy Jr. at a free event open to the public in New York City. Bobby will be talking about "Our Environmental Future," and I invite you to join us for an evening with America's most powerful environmental communicator.

It can be challenging to express the value of preserving the environment to a broader American public. Yet no one is more effective at this than Bobby.

Bobby has worked with NRDC for years, and I have seen time and again how he can captivate a roomful of people and inspire them to action. This is partly due to his famous oratory skills, but it is also a result of his passion, which becomes contagious.

Bobby is devoted to protecting our nation's commons--our lakes, rivers, wildlands, even our air--from corporate greed and dangerous pollutants. He is especially committed to ending the egregious practice of mountaintop removal mining for coal.

When Bobby describes his work in the field or taps into his extensive knowledge of energy-company practices, he vividly illustrates the hazards of our addiction to dangerous energy. When people ask him about nuclear power, for instance, he says, "I am all for nuclear energy if we can make it economical and safe. Right now it is neither. It is still the most catastrophically expensive method every devised for boiling a pot of water."

But Bobby doesn't just reveal the absurdities of our current energy policy. He points the way to a brighter future. He outlines the cleaner, more sustainable solutions that can power our economy without endangering our children's health or our natural legacy.

What are these clean energy technologies? Bobby will discuss them in his talk, and I will also describe them briefly myself.

Last week, I released my first book, Clean Energy Common Sense. A pocket-sized, 99-page, quick read, it is a concise overview of the dangers of climate change and the solutions that will end this crisis, jumpstart our economy, and strengthen our national security.

I will talk a little bit about the book tomorrow night, because Bobby and I both share a deeply held belief: Now, while our leaders are gathering in Washington, China, and Copenhagen to figure out how to confront global warming, Americans can do three things to create a more sustainable future--get involved, learn more, and take action.

You can start by coming to tomorrow night's event at Town Hall (123 W. 43rd Street). If you are interested in attending, you can found out more and RSVP at here or on Facebook.

Salazar Cleans Up Bush-Era Cronyism in Dirty Oil-Shale Program

2009-10-22T17:21:42Z

Just as support for clean energy and climate solutions is growing among Americans from all walks of life--from Fortune 500 executives to Iraqi war veterans to union members--we learn new secrets about the old forces eager to keep us hooked on dirty fossil fuels.

This week, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar asked the Inspector General to investigate the oil-shale lease agreements the Bush administration authorized just days before it left office. Negotiated with the help of Gale Norton, Bush's former secretary of the interior turn oil company representative, the leases cover 30,000 acres of public lands, yet they required oil companies to pay only 5 percent in royalties to American taxpayers instead of the more typical rate of 16 percent.

The leases also turned a blind eye to the fact that oil shale production releases upwards of five times as much greenhouse gas as conventional oil.

This sweetheart deals raises a question for all Americans: Do we want energy development on our public lands to intensify global warming or do we want a national energy policy that promotes technologies that are renewable, generate zero greenhouses gases, and create four times jobs as fossil fuels?

You see the vast majority of the world's oil shale reserves are found in the Green River formation in northwest Colorado, northeast Utah, and southwest Wyoming where seven out of every ten acres are managed by the federal government on behalf of the American people.

During the Bush administration, the interests of us citizens took a back seat to corporate profits. Extracting oil from shale involves heating sedimentary rock at high temperatures to turn it into a liquid. It is an untested process; no commercial production is currently operating in the United States today. Yet the Bush administration decided to effectively subsidize R&D for fossil fuel companies at a time when the global energy market is moving toward cleaner technologies.

Salazar's decision to reform the Department of Interior's oil shale program brings welcome change to an industry that has been rife with cronyism and corruption. Salazar said in his statement:

Taxpayers deserve answers to serious questions about why these lease addenda were granted at the eleventh hour, under what circumstances, and at what potential expense to the federal treasure. We must reform our nation's oil shale program.

Not all of Salazar's changes to the program go far enough. I question, for instance, the need to make additional public lands open to oil shale development given the significant amount already under private control. But I am pleased that the new system for bidding on leases appears to place greater emphasis on transparent reviews and scientific findings instead of political favoritism.

Young Veterans Tell Congress: Cleaner Energy Is Safer for America

2009-10-16T16:45:34Z

I have read plenty of briefings about the national security risks posed by climate change, but it is far more powerful to hear about them from people who have seen the grave consequences of our oil dependence first hand: veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

This week, Operation Free, a coalition of veteran and national security groups, launched a 21-state bus tour so veterans can speak directly to American people about how climate change is undermining our safety and why we need to pass clean energy and climate legislation as quickly as possible. (You can follow along with one of my NRDC colleagues Rocky Kistner, who has jumped on the bus and is blogging and posting videos along the way.)

These veterans aren't alone in their concern. As the New York Times reported back in August, American defense and intelligence agencies consider climate change to be a significant threat to national security. The Pentagon has included climate change in their Quadrennial Defense Review this year, for instance, and the CIA has just opened its own center on climate change.

But even as our government moves to understand this growing threat, our servicemen and women continue to pay the price for America's addiction to dirty fossil fuels.

Rick Hegdahl, one of the veterans on the bus tour, explained that when he was stationed in Kuwait during the 2003 lead-up to the Iraq invasion, he commanded a patrol boat for the Navy. His mission was to keep watch over giant oil tankers waiting to be fueled up.

"It really dawned on me that the primary reason we were there was to control the shipping lanes for oil. I said, 'Something's wrong. Something's really wrong.'"

Something is really wrong when we send our young men and women into a war zone to protect oil supplies when we have many cleaner, more sustainable options for powering our economy.

Members of my family have headed into war zones in the past. My father was a Navy man who spent 44 months at sea during World War II. My brother served in the Marine Corps in the Vietnam War. He shipped out when I was a college freshman at a school awash in strong antiwar sentiment. It was painful to know my brother was risking his life for a mission so many of us had lost faith in.

Now another generation of young people is questioning why America has sent so many of our brave soldiers overseas once again. Many of those asking the questions this time around are veterans. And they want to know why we fight when alternatives to the resource we are battling over already exist here at home.

"Veterans of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are among the strongest advocates for clean energy in America today," wrote James Taylor, one of the Operation Free members on his blog. "We understand the need to rein in climate-altering pollution better than most. We see with stark clarity the need for America to break its reliance on foreign oil."

Veterans like Taylor believe the best way to do that is to pass clean energy and climate legislation. A bill already passed the House in June; now the Senate is considering its own version, the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act.

The bill is co-sponsored by Senator John Kerry, another veteran who believes that fighting climate change is better for national security than fighting wars over oil.

Battling climate change also has the added benefit of putting millions of Americans to work building the clean energy infrastructure of the future. This is the kind of safe, well-paying, and meaningful work our veterans deserve to find when they return home from duty.

To show your support for this clean energy mission, click here to find out of the Operation Free bus tour will be traveling through a city near you.