Legalectric

or

Either way, it’s all the same, corporate whores who can’t get it up! Today, a little accountability.

Today Environmental Defense’s office in Washington D.C. was occupied and re-branded “Environmental Offense.” Yes, the office of ED was occupied by members of Global Justice Ecology Project, Global Forest Coalition, and Rising Tide North America and Rising Tide Ecuador. ED was scoured and tested by Green & Wash LLC, and awarded with a CRAP credit… Certified Realists for Atmospheric Privatization, that is…

First Hand Account of Environmental Defense Occupation

ED Update on It’s Getting Hot in Here

Today, Environmental Defense, tomorrow, the Izaak Walton League/Wind on the Wires? The Doris Duke Foundation? (Doris Duke just dumped $750k into National Resources Defense Council for Cap & Trade). The Joyce Foundation? I hope they understand that we know who they are and we know what they’re doing!

The office was taped off as a Global Warming Crime Scene:

Here is the full statement in technicolor from Dr. Rachel Smolker, daughter of one of the founders of Environmental Defense, Robert E. Smolker, taken from the Global Justice Ecology Project site:

My name is Rachel Smolker. When I was a child, growing up on Long Island, my father, Robert E Smolker, along with Charlie Wurster, Dennis Puleston and Art Cooley, used to sit around in the living room sipping their beers and discuss environmental issues. My father, an ornithologist, was observing the thinning of predatory bird eggshells caused by DDT, Rachel Carson’s seminal work on the impacts of pesticides was still relatively warm off the presses, and their were already many, many indications that virtually all ecosystems were in decline: the beautiful wetlands surrounding our island were contaminated and littered with garbage, fisheries were declining, and from afar, the drumbeat of deforestation, pollution, and climate change. Yes, way back then. Climate change was an issue very few knew anything about, but I would say it came as no surprise o those who spent time in the natural world and understood the delicate intricacies of ecological systems on a tiny blue speck of a planet, more or less accidentally blanketed in a thin and accommodating atmosphere.

I watched these men as they talked, sometimes seriously, sometimes with tremendous humor, and almost always with a deep sense of commitment and comeraderie. I was 10-12 years old, on the brink of puberty and frankly not all that much interested, but I respected them and as I grew up recognized the importance of this phenomenon, called EDF, which germinated out of the couches of my home.

My father and his friends celebrated their capacity to act together when EDF achieved bans on DDT in the early 70s. They brought lawyers and scientists and fundraisers and administrators and many others onboard and expanded the organization, experienced and overcame some growing pains and enjoyed a number of victories.

My father passed away in 1985. By that time, EDF had at least a few offices dotted around the country, and sizeable resources. The organization was, already, under the leadership of Fredd Krupp. Before his death, he complained to me that he “did not approve of the direction in which the organization was headed”.

Why? What was he foreseeing? I think I understand now:

EDF has swelled and mushroomed into the darling of the corporate world: advocating for “market incentives” to “encourage” corporations to stop their destructive practices, provided they do not cause “economic hardship”. Like the corporations you have befriended, you too have become entirely beholden to the gods of endless economic growth. The goal of protecting the environment has been relegated to the back seat.

EDF’s corporate partnership approach sounded friendly and sort of “new” back in the 80’s. Sure, perhaps there was some potential in trying to reform polluting practices “from the inside”. EDF proudly designed the market trading system for sulphur emissions causing acid rain, among numerous other accomplishments. That emissions trading model, hailed as a breakthrough in “harnessing market forces in service of environmental goals”, has now been carried over to the international arena and become the central approach to addressing global warming emissions.

Carbon emissions trading is now formally enshrined within the Kyoto Protocol, and within almost every state, federal and international initiative for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It has in fact become pretty much the only game in town.

You argue that it is the “least expensive” means of lowering emissions, allowing companies to avoid costly abatement by purchasing credits from others who could more easily reduce their emissions. A sort of “kinder gentler” approach to lowering carbon emissions.

But let me ask you. Is it working? Has it worked? Will it work fast enough? Is it in our best interests at this point to make things kind and gentle and inexpensive for these polluters? Is that our priority?

I would ask that you take a trip outside of Washington, put on your boots and jeans and anoraks: travel to the Arctic community of Kivalina and talk with the folks there who are filing suit against your bedfellows in the fossil fuel industry over the extermination of their community and their entire lifestyle. I say, you are guilty by association. EDF has become the mistress of murderers. While James Hansen and others suggest they should
be put on trial for their crimes against humanity, you would have us reward them!

You would have us reward them by turning the atmosphere into private property, dividing it into pieces and generously bequeathing the pieces as gifts to these corporate criminals. And in doing so, you provide them with a license to carry on with their dirty business and pretend to be doing something other than advancing their own profits. While they drill and mine and pump and plunder with one hand, the other is busy shaking hands with Fred Krupp. EDF has been the primary architects and advocates of “market approaches” which do nothing but pad the coffers of climate criminals while doing nothing to avert global warming.

EDF has turned itself into a corporate makeover facility. The most polluting companies on earth walk in here seeking advice on how to better paint themselves green. EDF does the paint job and then hands out free samples and an eternity’s worth of coupons for future cash-in. What comes out the other end is business as usual, and a few added digits on the organization‚s salary balance sheets.

I have two young children. I am not going to launch into a teary-eyed appeal to you about their future, don‚’t worry.

No: I am going to tell you something about being a parent that I think is relevant: When my children do something naughty, do I yell at them and take away some privileges? Or do I offer them a candy in exchange for halting their naughtiness? Welllll- some would advocate the candy approach, but what happens when they realize that the outcome of their naughtiness is to receive candy? Of course they can’t wait to be naughty again! That is your approach to dealing with polluting corporations; reward them with permits to pollute and a new paintjob.

That is why they are knocking down your doors. Your Climate Action Partnership? Well, no shit Sherlock – the dirtiest most polluting industries made windfall profits off the European Emissions Trading Scheme, which has been deemed completely ineffective if not counterproductive as a means of reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.

No wonder these corporations are eager to sign on to the CAP and have you championing such an approach! They know the climate change grim reaper is on his way. They see the writing on the walls. Would they prefer to be regulated and fined and forced to behave like proper citizens of the global community? Or would they prefer to hide behind some smoke and mirrors, receive permits to pollute, pass along the cost of purchasing those permits to their ratepayers if possible, and then rake in rewards for sort of maybe doing what they should absolutely for the sake of us all should be doing in any case? You provide them the means to enhance profits and paint themselves green at the same time! WoW!

We cannot pretend that handing out permits to pollute and then trading them around like baseball cards is even remotely related to seriously reducing emissions. It is a great get-rich-quick scheme for the brokers, marketers and financiers who enjoy playing games with my childrens‚ future, and it is a huge gift to the polluting criminals.

Offsetting emissions is a similar deceit, nothing but another fine arrangement of smoke and mirrors that allow some people to “feel good” while continuing to carry on business as usual. They provide a convenient way to sidestep and avoid real and necessary change. It is, without question, a lovely idea to provide funding to really good “quality” projects that hold promise of reducing emissions, but there are more straightforward ways to get there that do not require unfounded and unreliable measures of carbon flow, additionality, verifiability or permanence, and do not confuse fossil and biological carbon. We clearly
need to halt, not offset emissions, even where it is a hard thing, a very hard thing to do.

We are here today because we have simply had enough. In fact we reached that point quite a while ago, and since then have been gathering our courage and building the solidarity that is required to stand up for the very future of life on earth in the most effective, meaningful manner possible. It is a mightily sad state of affairs, when a group of dedicated activists, who are keenly aware of the dire crisis we are facing, must come to the offices of one of the world‚s biggest and most influential “environmental organizations” to protest. People you see before you have chained themselves to the gates of coal fired power plants and to the doors of the World Bank. They have stood up to corporate thugs and threats, they have put themselves in harms way to stand up for what is right and what MUST be done to protect the future of life.

We cannot afford to wait, or to fail, or to only half succeed at this point.

EDF: It is time to admit to the failure of the market based policies you are advocating: The Kyoto Protocol, the European Trading Scheme – these have failed us, and in the process have blinded and bedazzled so many that the real solutions to the crisis have fallen into the shadows where they are languishing. Now it is time to face the facts and turn every ounce of your substantial weight towards DEMANDING that your corporate bedfellows strip off their phony green veneer, halt the pillaging of our futures, and give REAL solutions to climate change their due opportunity. Yes it will be hard, yes it will force change upon the polluters. But the cost of inaction, or ineffective action, will be much, much greater.

The incoming administration has made it clear that they intend to adopt a cap and trade legislation, along with a suite of other questionable steps intended to address the crisis of climate change, including “clean coal,” nuclear energy and agrofuels. EDF as a massively influential organization will undoubtedly play a role in shaping this legislation. It is time to stop pandering to the corporate criminals. We can no longer make corporate profits a priority over swift and severe measures to avoid catastrophe. We can no longer concern ourselves with making it easy or less costly or any other such warm and fuzzy goodwill towards the corporations that are responsible for the destruction. We can no longer count on the magic of markets to achieve the deep, real, meaningful and essential changes that are needed.

EDF: I wish I could say I am proud of my own father’s legacy! But it is, sadly, the case that I have to apologize, offer disclaimers, make explanations when pronouncing my relationship to this organization. I can hear my father rolling over in his grave! EDF has strayed so far from his vision, from the mission of protecting and advocating for the environment, that it would now be completely unrecognizable to him. Were he to rise up from the dead, I can only hope that these plush digs and six figure salaries would convince him there is no relationship between the current manifestation of this organization and himself.

For me, it is deeply ironic that I find myself here today, taking action against this organization which so shaped my early world view, and which I have now come to see as a primary obstacle to averting planetary crisis: the architects and powerful advocates of extraordinarily dangerous and distracting policy advice.

I HOPE that the people working here will take a very deep look in the mirror and ask yourselves: are we REALLY doing the right thing? Are we true to our mission? To ourselves? To our children and to the future of life on this little blue speck?

CLICK HERE : Native Village of Kivalina and City of Kivalina – Complaint for Damages

.

Downgraded “Tropical Storm” Hanna is hitting today, flooding is expected, rain has started, some wind — Alan got the generator ready to rock just in case, and I’m glad the roof’s done. Kenya, terrified of storms, is under my feet, lying on the cords and powerstrip (EMF therapy for her bad leg, yeah, that’s it)…

I think all would agree that “it’s been quite a week.”

Placid Lake Wobegon Begets a Nasty Police State

MPR: The View of a Protest

A linked snippet from the Daily Planet ”This is your domestic terrorist”:

Attorneys for Minnesota Nine call criminal charges outrageous

Mordecai Specktor, father of Max (pictured together) and editor of the American Jewish World newspaper, stated that his son was held in solitary confinement for two days before being released on bail. “The criminal complaint here is farfetched, overblown, outrageous,” he said. “I encourage all the journalists here to look into the specifics of this complaint and see where the truth really lies.” Specktor then put his arm around his son. “This is your domestic terrorist,” he said. “Take a good look. I don’t believe it at all. Give me a break.”

The other defendants are Nathanael David Secor, Erik Charles Oseland, Garrett Scott Fitzgerald, Monica Rachel Bicking and Eryn Trimmer. [TC Daily Planet note: A ninth defendant, Carrie Feldman, was arrested on September 3 and was still in custody at the time of the press conference.]

And the STrib:

Massive show of force fits the trend

The Minnesota ACLU quote in here really starts off wrong:

“Attempts by law enforcement to squelch lawful political speech and stifle the press have no place in our democracy and are unacceptable,” Anthony D. Romero, ACLU executive director, said in a statement. “Political conventions should be a showcase for free expression, not a venue for bullying and intimidation.”

ATTEMPTS?!?! It wasn’t “attempts,” Mr. Romero, they really did it! He does better on the ACLU site:

“Arresting journalists to keep them from doing their jobs is a blatant violation of their constitutional rights and the right of the American public to be kept informed,” said Chuck Samuelson, Executive Director of the ACLU of Minnesota. “The arrest of several journalists during the Republican National Convention is a disturbing practice and a violation of their First Amendment right to gather the news.”

John Lundquist, Fredrickson & Byron, will be representing Goodman, Kouddous and Salazar of Democracy Now! His PowerPoint of advice in a white collar situation:

Lundquist: What to do when the Feds are at the door

Here’s the ACLU Press Release about other journalists (I think it’s Matthew Ludt, not Lute, representing them):

Photojournalists from Kentucky released from jail without charges after unjustified 36 hour detainment

Here’s the statement from Amnesty International:

Use of Force Against RNC Protesters “Disproportionate,” Charges Amnesty International

[London]–Amnesty International is concerned by allegations of excessive use of force and mass arrests by police at demonstrations in St. Paul, Minnesota during the Republican National Convention (RNC) from September 1-4, 2008. The human rights organization is calling on the city and county authorities to ensure that all allegations of ill-treatment and other abuses are impartially investigated, with a review of police tactics and weapons in the policing of demonstrations.

The organization’s concerns arise from media reports, video and photographic images which appear to show police officers deploying unnecessary and disproportionate use of non-lethal weapons on non-violent protestors marching through the streets or congregating outside the arena where the Convention was being held.

Amnesty International urges that an inquiry be carried out promptly, that its findings and recommendations be made public in a timely manner. If the force used is found to have been excessive and to have contravened the principles of necessity and proportionality, then those involved should be disciplined, measures put in place and training given to ensure future policing operations conform to international standards.

Police are reported to have fired rubber bullets and used batons, pepper spray, tear gas canisters and concussion grenades on peaceful demonstrators and journalists. Amnesty International has also received unconfirmed reports that some of those arrested during the demonstrations may have been ill-treated while held at Ramsey county jail.

Amnesty International is also concerned at reports that several journalists who were covering the RNC were arbitrarily arrested while filming and reporting on the demonstrations. They include host of independent news program Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman, and two of the program’s producers, Sharif Abdel Kouddous and Nicole Salazar, who were both allegedly subjected to violence during their arrest. A photographer for the Associated Press (AP) and other journalists were also arrested while covering the demonstrations.

Kouddous described his arrest to media, “…two or three police officers tackled me. They threw me violently against a wall. Then they threw me to the ground. I was kicked in the chest several times. A police officer ground his knee into my back…I was also, the entire time, telling them, ‘I’m media. I’m press….,’ but…that didn’t seem to matter at all.”

Amnesty International recognizes the challenges involved in policing large scale demonstrations and that some protestors may have been involved in acts of violence or obstruction. However, some of the police actions appear to have breached United Nations (U.N.) standards on the use of force by law enforcement officials. These stipulate, among other things, that force should be used only as a last resort, in proportion to the threat posed, and should be designed to minimize damage or injury. Some of the treatment also appears to have contravened U.S. laws and guidelines on the use of force. The U.N. standards also stress that everyone is allowed to participate in lawful and peaceful assemblies, in accordance with the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

For more information, please contact the AIUSA media office at 202-544-0200 x302 or visit our website at www.amnestyusa.org.

From this

… to this

What is Tim Pawlenty, the Green Chameleon, thinking? Very odd move… I cannot believe, though I guess it’s good if some of Koppendrayer’s beliefs about Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Project are genetically implanted in her brain… but some things I find in a search do not bode well. First, she has ZERO experience in utilities. ZERO.

Second, she seems to spout off the way Koppendrayer does. Earlier this session, Wergin weighed in on a bill that would allow chiropractors to practice on animals, saying:

We need to keep in perspective the differences beween animals and humans.

[Animals] do not have the same status of humans… Animals are checked into the cargo space of airplanes.

Here’s Wergin’s take on whistleblower Paul Wotzka testifying:

Paul Wotzka is a hydrologist who worked for the Department of Agriculture for 16 years and then moved to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Last spring, he was invited to testify before a different legislative committee, but his superiors refused permission. Shortly afterward he was fired.

The state maintains Wotzka was fired not for his interest in testifying, but because he took files from the Agriculture Department to his new job.

Sen. Betsy Wergin says that’s reason enough not to have him testify.

“And Senator Marty I’m going to ask that you not have this person testify because I think it’s wrong,” she said.

And then there’s this — Wergin and Laura Brod were leading the GOP charge against Franken:

Here’s Pawlenty’s official blather:

“Betsy has a tremendous combination of small business and public policy experience as well as extensive community involvement,” Governor Pawlenty said. “This perspective will be a great benefit to her on the PUC.”

… now she’s on the PUC… what does this mean? Given a comparison of my little bro’s opinions and mine, it’s even more confusing!

The Delmarva Power/Bluewater wind deal, and the first offshore wind project in the U.S., is just about reality.  Monday the Power Purchase Agreement was signed and announced.  At that time there were some legislative tweaks, one including approval of Delmarva Power taking 3.5 Renewable Energy Credits for each “real” one, which didn’t go over real well.  Today, it all was happening at the legislature, where it passed both the House and Senate.  In the Senate, Delmarva Power toady said, on the record, that they really didn’t intend to take 3.5 credits for each one, nope, no, really, that wasn’t what they meant… uh-huh, sure, right, anything you say… so anyway, we don’t know what the actual bill is at this point, and I’ll post if I get my mitts on it.

So from the legislature, it sped over to the Governor, Ruth Ann Minner, the “Keg with Legs,” and she signed it, el pronto, and it’s on the front page of the paper already, minutes after it was signed:

Governor signs offshore wind legislation

By GINGER GIBSON • The News Journal • June 25, 2008

Gov. Ruth Ann Minner signed legislation today that will enable the completion of the Bluewater Wind/Delmarva Power agreement, announced earlier this week. The signing comes after both chambers of the state Legislature unanimously approved the legislation.

Senate Bill 328 was filed on the floor by Majority Leader Sen. Anthony DeLuca, D-Varlano, moments before it was considered for a vote.

Because of the speed with which it was filed and considered, it was voted upon before the specifics and wording of the bill were made available to the public.

Clarification was made on the floor of the Senate to explain the state will not decrease the amount of units in the renewable energy portfolio by approving the terms of the agreement.

Several members of the Senate spoke in favor of the legislation and recognized DeLuca for working to get the agreement between the two companies worked out.

“There were times I never thought we would get to this day,” Sen. Karen Peterson, D-Stanton, said.

While some spoke in favor of the legislation, they reminded fellow members that this measure should only be considered a first step in pursuing the use of renewable energy.

“I think with respect to renewables we have a long way to go,” Sen. David Sokola, D-Newark, said. “Our dependency on fossil fuels is harming us in many ways.”

GO BLUEWATER!!  EEEEEEEEEEEE-HA!

This is another one of those “HOW STUPID CAN THEY BE” posts, based on some searching today for what various regional gasbag groups are doing across the country. I was at the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord site, looking for geographic boundaries, and I stumbled on this in the Allowances Subgroup Conference Call Materials for June 3, 2008:

Carbon Sequestration Incentive

And now, here’s where I start my rant, this one point jumping out and hitting me over the head. First, let’s be really clear here — they’re talking about IGCC – Coal Gasification:

The goal of the program is too ease financing of a risky capital intensive technology.

Then, they go into CO2 Carbon Capture and Storage:

Federal Department of Energy (or appropriate agency) takes title to and liability for long-term storage of CO2 from selected projects.

DOESN’T ANYONE ON THIS COMMITTEE HAVE THE BRAINS OF A GNAT SUFFICIENT TO THINK ABOUT “TAKES TITLE TO AND LIABILITY FOR LONG-TERM STORAGE” AND THINK OF NUCLEAR WASTE?

For a while now, I’ve been saying that IGCC is the new nuclear, it’s a technology they want to build without experience, without all the questions answered, without the promoters and developers taking responsibility for what it is they’re promoting and building, and now, this hare-brained scheme? HOW STUPID CAN THEY BE?

If you want to know what happens with nuclear waste in this type of scenario:

NSP v. DOE – 224 F3d 1361

Short version? They don’t know what to do with nuclear waste and don’t know how to store it long term. In a CO2 context, it’s no different, they don’t know what to do with it and don’t know how to store it long term. Taking title and liability for long term storage does nothing for their inability to do it! We’re still left holding the bag. Recourse? Essentially none. Can’t make them store nuclear waste which they don’t know how to do and can’t do. Can’t make them store CO2 which they don’t know how to do and can’t do. And this does exactly what for global warming and greenhouse gas emissions?

HOW STUPID CAN WE BE? ARE THEY REALLY SERIOUS IN SUGGESTING THIS? WHOSE IDEA WAS THIS ANYWAY? In Minnesota, we should be hyperaware of this issue, and this is a “Midwestern” group. WHAT LUNACY…

HAVE I MADE MY POINT?

… sigh…

Here’s the text in full:

EIX calls for the creation of an incentive program to encourage existing and new players to invest in carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology.

The goal of the program is too ease financing of a risky capital intensive technology.
Improve on bonus allowance allocations, by eliminating allowance price risk.
Build on the success of the wind Production Tax Credit (PTC).
Federal guarantee of revenue either as cash payments or a PTC.
10 year term of payment
Reduce financing cost through accelerated depreciation
Federal Department of Energy (or appropriate agency) takes title to and liability for long-term storage of CO2 from selected projects.

Auction revenues fund payment for CO2 captured and geologically sequestered.
Program size limited to funding stream created by Bingaman–Specter CCS bonus allowances
CCS Bonus allowances monetized in auction and used to back Federal payments
Incentive payment per ton is calculated using either a:
Regional marginal emission rate at a level that makes the CCS unit competitive, from a marginal cost standpoint, with a combined cycle natural gas generator.
Reverse auction where 10 year Federal fixed price contracts are awarded to the lowest offered cost of sequestration.

To Qualify:
Project put in service before 2035.
Project designed to capture and store not less than 65% of CO2 stack emissions
Sequestration facility certified by EPA/DOE.
EPA/DOE to establish certification criteria for geological sequestration facilities.