Welcome to the eKos Earthship, your one-stop-shop for green diaries and series.
Tonight's editor: LaughingPlanet
••
••
Most people know eating meat leaves a larger carbon footprint.
Or does it? A new Mother Jones article from the NN10 shwag bag questions our assumptions. Also, what about milk & dairy? We seem to hear a lot about meat, but are not all animal foods impactful with regards to climate change?
And the late-breaking Utah tar sands news simply must be the top story after the groundswell of support from this lovely community yesterday.
••
••
Beneath the fold you will find news and notes, community announcements, and our eco-diary roundup.
All views expressed by today's editor do not necessarily represent those of eKos or eKos listed diarists.
Quote of the day:
"Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for - and in many cases is already affecting - a broad range of human and natural systems."
- The US National Research Council is unequivocal in its assessment of the climate change threat
TOP STORY
The hearing about the potentially disastrous Utah tar sands went well. The support from people on this site was palpable, and gave the grassroots opposition a needed boost before their big day.
From Salt Lake City to Canada, the news has been in 24-point bold headlines all day:
canadianbusiness.com:
Utah regulator promises to review agency's approval for first commercial oil-sands operation
Opponents said an oil-sands operation that produces so little petroleum isn't worth doing, given the potential damage to public lands. State officials responded that their job was simply to ensure Earth Energy follows environmental rules. The company obtained a lease on Utah's trust lands.
Utah's oil sands will never prove economical, argued Tim DeChristopher, an environmental activist who faces a September trial on felony charges of disrupting the Bush administration's final oil-and-gas auction in Utah.
"This project is a bridge to nowhere," DeChristopher said.
Salt Lake Tribune
Groups challenge plans for Utah tar sands mine
A small Canadian company, in need of millions for its ambitious plans, also is facing stiff opposition from two Utah environmental groups that are trying to thwart its efforts to build one of the first commercial tar sand mines in the country.
The Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM), held a hearing on Canadian company Earth Energy Resources’ proposal to mine tar sands in Grand and Uintah Counties in Eastern Utah. Well over half of the people attending the hearing came to support Peaceful Uprising and Living Rivers in opposing the mine. John Baza, Director of the the Division noted that there were far more people than usually attend these hearings.
And youth climate blogs:
It’s Getting Hot In Here
Dispatches from the Youth Climate Movement:
http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/...
The biggest message that came out of this hearing is that no one is steering this ship. There is no single agency or government body evaluating whether tar sands development is actually a good idea for Utah. Instead, each agency simply approves rules and permits that were not designed for to regulate the tar sands industry. If Utah is going to consider opening up its lands and waters to tar sands, we should actually have that conversation about Utah’s energy future.
“This is only the beginning,” said Ashley Anderson, Coordinator of Peaceful Uprising. “Communities around the state and country are getting active in opposing the tar sands. We’ll be there fighting back every step of the way.”
The get involved in the fight, visit: www.peacefuluprising.org/notarsands
Thanks to you all, we might be able to halt this project and keep a Canadian company from making a huge mess out of a critical section of our mountainous headwaters of the Colorado.
Minor victories in succession add up to big stuff in the end.
Here is a primer about just how awful the Alberta tar sands project really is:
Canada's Dirty Oil: Breaking Our Addiction - General audience (long version) from Dirty Oil Sands on Vimeo.
So I've been thinking about food.
For many years, I was a strict veggie, much of that time vegan. I still don't eat milk products, but I do eat eggs and meat today.
It was a tough choice, but I believe some of us are more inclined to an omnivorous diet than others. So here are a few items that might help people look at their food choices a bit differently.
http://www.greenpeace.org/...
What's wrong with dairy?
The majority of agricultural emissions in New Zealand come from the dairy sector. The dairy industry is responsible for the entire increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the agricultural sector since 1990. Indeed, had dairy related emissions remained constant at their 1990 level, New Zealand's agriculture sector emissions would have actually fallen, because of the decrease in sheep industry emissions and the negligible increase in emissions from beef and other agricultural activities.
http://www.treehugger.com/...
New research published in the journal Global Environmental Change shows that by reducing the amount of meat and dairy eaten and changing farming practices, by 2055 we could reduce emissions of methane and nitrous oxide--two greenhouse gases far more potent than carbon dioxide--from agricultural sources by more than 80%.
Summing up the research, study lead author Alexander Popp of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research says, "Meat and milk really matter.
Dairy cows fart too
http://www.sustainabledairyfarming.c...
The cow as an environmental disaster
Ten years ago practically nobody had heard of a carbon footprint. Today the impact of human activities on the environment is one of the biggest issues. Dairy farming plays an important role in causing pollution. A cow is an environmental disaster. She puffs out all kinds of gases (particularly methane) which harm the environment and contributes to the climate change. The production of feed and milk products is also accompanied by a huge amount of greenhouse gases.
As for the mother jones piece:
...if you swear off meat completely, you're missing out on some great caloric bargains—fish like sardines, anchovies, and herring, the grazers of the ocean, yield about 110 calories for every 100 spent. By contrast, eggs, with a caloric yield of just 11, are "very inefficient in terms of greenhouse gas, land, water, and nitrogen—almost any variable you choose to look at," Eshel says. Yet some greens are even worse: The caloric yield of supermarket spinach and mesclun, for instance, is worse than that of beef, since growing it in winter climates requires heated greenhouses, while shipping and storing it in warm weather requires refrigeration. The take-home message: There are no shortcuts.
Of course, no matter what we do here, in a global economy, there is always a new and bigger challenge ahead:
With the global climate pact dead, China gets hungry for U.S. factory pork
China's growing appetite for meat -- and its rapid conversion to U.S.-style industrial meat production -- may prove just as damaging to the climate as its growing proliferation of cars.
ugh
Brace yourself.
The price tag for the coming Chevy Volt?
Over $41,000
Are Electric Cars Too Expensive?
Indeed, it “makes a bigger statement than the Toyota Prius,” a hybrid sedan that for years has been the reigning symbol of environmental friendliness. “But do I think it’s going to be a volume seller? No,” he says.
The Volt could lose out to the $32,780 Nissan Leaf expected to go on sale around the same time. Chevrolet says its car is worth more in part because its gasoline engine generates electricity when the battery runs low. But Mr. Magliano says extended range may be less of a selling point for buyers, many of whom have more than one vehicle anyway. Those buyers are still going to use their conventional gasoline-powered vehicle for long road trips.
People looking for a commuter car might choose the less-expensive (Nissan) Leaf
No shit.
Almost $10,000 less, at that.
Bye, American?
As seen in Top Comments here at Dkos tonight, King Coal will flex its multi-billion-dollar muscle to defeat Democrats in elections this year.
YAY, free speech!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
Coal Companies Look To Spend Big To Influence Elections With A 527 Group
In the wake of the recent Supreme Court ruling allowing unlimited spending on elections by unions and companies, coal giants are looking to form a group to pump cash into state races. Among the potential members is Massey Energy, the coal company notorious for the worst mining disaster in recent history when 29 miners were killed in April at its Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia.
The Kentucky Herald-Leader obtained an undated letter from Roger Nicholson, senior vice president and general counsel at International Coal Group to other coal giants in which he wrote, "with the recent Supreme Court ruling, we are in a position to be able to take corporate positions that were not previously available in allowing our voices to be heard."
Ain't love (of money) grand?
++++
Warren S never sleeps, I tells ya:
It speaks volumes that a process that is “considered key for addressing climate change” rests on “a largely unproven concept.” The problems involved in economical carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) from burning coal are immense, and the technology is still in its infancy. It’s important to fund research and development in CCS, because it may lead to methods of removing carbon dioxide not only from coal plants, but from our atmosphere itself, where the greenhouse gas has built to dangerous levels. But it is both bizarre and tragic that we consider a yet-to-be-developed technology as an integral element of our response to an immediate crisis; if your house is on fire, you don’t have time for the fire department to invent a new kind of pump. There is an excellent way to keep the carbon in coal from entering the atmosphere: leave it in the ground. We Americans must radically transform our consumption habits, and recognize that our nationality conveys no inherent right to waste the Earth’s resources, further accelerating the climate crisis.
Novel concept!
Thanks, Warren.
Keep up the great work!
And yes, we DO steal your letters!
:-)
Going to recycle this shot that appeared in my Monday afternoon diary
A bit ironic that the last time I hosted an Earthship this story was included here.
(Ironic because of the diaries I posted about Utah/oil)
Oil and gas drilling threatens Utah's Redrock Wilderness.
The Obama Administration has taken important steps to protect redrock country, but now these wildlands must be permanently safeguarded.
It took millions of years to create the delicate sandstone arches and swirling crimson towers that rise over southern Utah's Redrock Wilderness. But it would take only days for unbridled oil and gas development to destroy this world-renowned natural treasure.
We have learned that our beloved eKos widget code is very sick.
patrickz has blessed us with a new widget code!
w00t!
(All times Eastern!)
eKos diaries from past 3 days or so:
Forgive me for not using the fancy system. Life was just too crazy to learn a new trick tonight.
What is eKos?
The eKos project is an effort to distribute environmental content on Daily Kos to a broader audience. When a diary has the 'eKos' tag, its information is collected in a database, which is then published in eKos Earthships and the eKos Library. We also Tweet all eKos diaries using the @eKos350 account, and distribute an RSS widget for use in Daily Kos diaries and comments. Diaries listed on eKos do not necessarily represent the views of the eKos Rangers or any other participating diarist. Participation in eKos is strictly voluntary, please let us know if you do not want the eKos tag!
Tag Rules
If you want to help out with tagging, here are a few simple rules to follow:
- If you see or write an eco-diary or front page story, tag it 'eKos'. and inform the diarist. Use of the tag is strictly voluntary, so always defer to the wishes of the diarist.
- Fix the tag if it is wrong ('e-kos' or 'ecos' tags won't work).
- Watch out for tag abuse. If someone other than the diarist removes the tag without justification, please put it back, and explain to them very politely why you did so. If there is still a disagreement, please contact us. If you see eKos tagged writing that is clearly not friendly to environmental causes, or which breaks site rules, please alert us via e-mail.
- Site rules prohibit calling out other Kossacks by name or user handle in the title of a diary. Don't tag diaries whose focus is to 'call-out' or directly criticize other Kossacks or diaries in an insulting or inflammatory way. It is fine if the diary addresses a meme or argument, as long as it sticks to substantive issues.
- If there are any other questions, comments, or issues, please e-mail ekos350atgmaildotcom.
Contact
You can follow us on Twitter
If you are interested in becoming a ranger or editor for eKos, or just want some more info, e-mail ekos350atgmaildotcom.
eKos Rangers
In no particular order:
Regina in a Sears Kit House
boatsie
Hopeful Skeptic
RLMiller
patrickz
Earthfire
Ellinorianne
A Siegel
dRefractor
SolarMom
Please give them some mojo if you see them, they deserve it!
Peruse the eKos Library to find previously listed diaries. You can also follow eKos on Twitter.