Will Barack Obama Make A Great President? If he stands as tall on the environment and energy as he talks

Posted on January 20, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

He has said some very good things on the “Green Economy” or Sustainability. If he does what he says he will be a great President. If he doesn’t, he won’t be a great President. Simple as that.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Environment.htm

Barack Obama on Environment

Democratic nomine for President; Junior Senator (IL)

Government should invest in clean energy & green jobs

Q: What would you do for the environment?OBAMA: It is critical that we understand this is not just a challenge, it?s an opportunity, because if we create a new energy economy, we can create five million new jobs, easily. It can be an engine that drives us into the future the same way the computer was the engine for economic growth over the last couple of decades. We can do it, but we?re going to have to make an investment. The same way the computer was originally invented by a bunch of government scientists who were trying to figure out, for defense purposes, how to communicate, we?ve got to understand that this is a national security issue, as well.

McCAIN: We can move forward, and clean up our climate, and develop green technologies, and alternative energies for battery-powered cars, so that we can clean up our environment and at the same time get our economy going by creating millions of jobs.

Source: 2008 second presidential debate against John McCain Oct 7, 2008

Willing to suspend ethanol subsidy to keep food prices down

Q: Ethanol usage in gas is criticized for raising food prices. Would you be willing to change ethanol subsidies so that people are not using corn for ethanol, & lowering food prices?A: We?ve got rising food prices here in the US. In other countries we?re seeing riots because of the lack of food supplies. So this is something that we?re going to have to deal with. There are a number of factors that go into this. Changes in climate are contributing. There?s no doubt that biofuels may be contributing to it. My top priority is making sure that people are able to get enough to eat. And if it turns out that we?ve got to make changes in our ethanol policy to help people get something to eat, then that?s got to be the step we take. But I also believe that ethanol has been a important transitional tool for us to start dealing with our long-term energy crisis ultimately. Over time we?re going to shift to cellulosic ethanol, where we?re not using food stocks but we?re using wood chips & prairie grass.

Source: Meet the Press: 2008 ?Meet the Candidates? series May 4, 2008

Genesis teaches stewardship of earth: sacrifice for future

Q: Could you give an example of how you relate your faith to science policy?A: One of the things I draw from the Genesis story is the importance of us being good stewards of the land, of this incredible gift. And I think there have been times where we haven?t been [good stewards], and this is one of those times where we?ve got to take the warning seriously [about climate change]. And part of what my religious faith teaches me is to take an intergenerational view, to recognize that we are borrowing thi planet from our children and our grandchildren. And this is where religious faith and the science of global warming converge: We have to find resources in ourselves to make sacrifices so we don?t leave it to the next generation. We?ve got to be less wasteful, both as a society and in our own individual lives. I think religion can actually bolster our desire to make those sacrifices now. As president, I hope to rally the entire world around the importance of us being good stewards of the land.

And he has been saying these things all campaign long:

http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/07/30/obama_factsheet/

Obama on the Issues

A look at Barack Obama’s environmental platform and record

In the early months of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign, enviros were skeptical of his (now heavily qualified) support for coal-to-liquids technology and unvarnished enthusiasm for ethanol, but he earned their respect with his aggressive climate and energy plan. The plan centers on a cap-and-trade system that aims for 80 percent emission reductions from 1990 levels by 2050 and calls for auctioning 100 percent of the pollution permits. It also includes a $150 billion investment to boost clean energy and create green jobs, along with fine-grained proposals to boost efficiency, build a smart electricity grid, and encourage public transportation. Enviros have also applauded Obama’s refusal to endorse a gas-tax holiday and his now somewhat qualified opposition to offshore oil drilling. Obama earned an 86 percent rating from the League of Conservation Voters for his first three years representing Illinois in the U.S. Senate (a lower score than might have been because he missed some votes while campaigning for president).

These folks are a good start:

http://enviros.barackobama.com/page/content/enviroshome

Welcome to our new website, Environmentalists for Obama!

Now, more than ever, our nation and world needs a strong environmental leader as President. The challenges posed by global warming and energy needs can only be solved by someone with a proven commitment and ability to engage all people in the critical effort to provide a safe, clean future for America. Barack Obama’s dedication to the environment has been well-established during his years as a state legislator and U.S. Senator. Environmentalists for Obama know that he is the answer to the tough challenges facing us today.

We represent people from all walks of life who are eager for a leader who will promote innovative solutions and reach across partisan and societal divides in our race to save the planet. Join us now to support Barack Obama’s vision for a cleaner, more secure future.

And please join the discussion on our blog. We only ask that participants show consideration and respect for each other. The Environmentalists for Obama blog is not an expression of the positions of Barack Obama or the campaign.

Why We Throw Things Away? Everything has value.

Posted on January 12, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

Isn’t throwing things away basically throwing money on the ground and walking away? Some people assert that discarding behavior originates in our time, historically, spent in the trees. In other words a primate swinging in the trees with no pockets throws everything away, even if its valuable sometimes. In fact if it is valuable and it lands on the ground and there is a predator around it could be lost forever.

Other people say that our discarding behavior is based in our hunting techniques. Once we figured out that we could kill other meat sources by throwing rocks and sticks then it was a simple step to throw other things away as well. But middens are an archaeological constant.

Still other people have pointed out that discarding behavior was probably a fact of our nomadic lives. They argue that for us to retain “things” we would have had to carry them. So there would be a point where a thing, like a broken spear, or a pot would no longer possess enough value that would make it worth carrying on to the next campsite.

But will that explain all of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landfill

Landfill

A landfill, also known as a dump (and historically as a midden), is a site for the disposal of waste materials by burial and is the oldest form of waste treatment. Historically, landfills have been the most common methods of organized waste disposal and remain so in many places around the world.

Landfills may include internal waste disposal sites (where a producer of waste carries out their own waste disposal at the place of production) as well as sites used by many producers. Many landfills are also used for other waste management purposes, such as the temporary storage, consolidation and transfer, or processing of waste material (sorting, treatment, or recycling).

A landfill also may refer to ground that has been filled in with soil and rocks instead of waste materials, so that it can be used for a specific purpose, such as for building houses. Unless they are stabilized, these areas may experience severe shaking or liquefaction of the ground in a large earthquake.

That hill is a garbage dump on an island in Florida. Or is this worth it?:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/the-worlds-rubbish-dump-a-garbage-tip-that-stretches-from-hawaii-to-japan-778016.html

The world’s rubbish dump:

a garbage tip that stretches from Hawaii to Japan

By Kathy Marks, Asia-Pacific Correspondent, and Daniel Howden
Tuesday, 5 February 2008

INDEPENDENT GRAPHICS

enlarge

A “plastic soup” of waste floating in the Pacific Ocean is growing at an alarming rate and now covers an area twice the size of the continental United States, scientists have said.

The vast expanse of debris – in effect the world’s largest rubbish dump – is held in place by swirling underwater currents. This drifting “soup” stretches from about 500 nautical miles off the Californian coast, across the northern Pacific, past Hawaii and almost as far as Japan.

:}
Please see this article…it is really really really scary.

Archer Daniels Midland And Greenwash – They profess green but consistenly pollute

Posted on January 9, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

We are going to trust these folks with our watershed?

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13646

Green Fuel’s Dirty Secret

by Sasha Lilley, Special to CorpWatch
June 1st, 2006

The town of Columbus, Nebraska, bills itself as a “City of Power and Progress.” If Archer Daniels Midland gets its way, that power will be partially generated by coal, one of the dirtiest forms of energy. When burned, it emits carcinogenic pollutants and high levels of the greenhouse gases linked to global warming.

Ironically this coal will be used to generate ethanol, a plant-based petroleum substitute that has been hyped by both environmentalists and President George Bush as the green fuel of the future. The agribusiness giant Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) is the largest U.S. producer of ethanol, which it makes by distilling corn. ADM also operates coal-fired plants at its company base in Decatur, Illinois, and Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and is currently adding another coal-powered facility at its Clinton, Iowa ethanol plant.

That’s not all. “[Ethanol] plants themselves – not even the part producing the energy – produce a lot of air pollution,” says Mike Ewall, director of the Energy Justice Network. “The EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) has cracked down in recent years on a lot of Midwestern ethanol plants for excessive levels of carbon monoxide, methanol, toluene, and volatile organic compounds, some of which are known to cause cancer.”

A single ADM corn processing plant in Clinton, Iowa generated nearly 20,000 tons of pollutants including sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds in 2004, according to federal records. The EPA considers an ethanol plant as a “major source” of pollution if it produces more than 100 tons of any one pollutant per year, although it has recently proposed increasing that cap to 250 tons.

Sulfur dioxide is classified by the EPA as a contributor to respiratory and heart disease and the generation of acid rain. Nitrogen oxides produce ozone and a wide variety of toxic chemicals as well as contributing to global warming, according to the EPA, while many volatile organic compounds are cancer-causing. Last year, Environmental Defense, a national environmental group, ranked the Clinton plant as the 26th largest emitter of carcinogenic compounds in the U.S.

For years, ADM promoted itself as the “supermarket to the world” on major U.S. radio and television networks like NPR, CBS, NBC, and PBS where it underwrites influential programs such as the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. Now, as it actively promotes its ethanol business, ADM has rolled out its new eco-friendly slogan, “Resourceful by Nature” which “reinforces our role as an essential link between farmers and consumers.”

Despite the company’s attempts at green packaging, ADM is ranked as the tenth worst corporate air polluter, on the “Toxic 100” list of the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts. The Department of Justice and the Environmental Protection Agency has charged the company with violations of the Clean Air Act in hundreds of processing units, covering 52 plants in 16 states. In 2003 the two agencies reached a $351 million settlement with the company. Three years earlier, ADM was fined $1.5 million by the Department of Justice and $1.1 million by the State of Illinois for pollution related to ethanol production and distribution. Currently, the corporation is involved in approximately 25 administrative and judicial proceedings connected to federal and state Superfund laws regarding the environmental clean-up of sites contaminated by ADM operations.

Even The Right Wing Doesn’t Like Archer Danieals Midland -How Often do I agree with the Cato Institute?

Posted on January 8, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

To date once:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-241.html

Archer Daniels Midland: A Case Study In Corporate Welfare

by James Bovard

James Bovard is an associate policy analyst with the Cato Institute. His most recent book is Shakedown: How the Government Screws You from A to Z (Viking, 1995).

Executive Summary

The Archer Daniels Midland Corporation (ADM) has been the most prominent recipient of corporate welfare in recent U.S. history. ADM and its chairman Dwayne Andreas have lavishly fertilized both political parties with millions of dollars in handouts and in return have reaped billion-dollar windfalls from taxpayers and consumers. Thanks to federal protection of the domestic sugar industry, ethanol subsidies, subsidized grain exports, and various other programs, ADM has cost the American economy billions of dollars since 1980 and has indirectly cost Americans tens of billions of dollars in higher prices and higher taxes over that same period. At least 43 percent of ADM’s annual profits are from products heavily subsidized or protected by the American government. Moreover, every $1 of profits earned by ADM’s corn sweetener operation costs consumers $10, and every $1 of profits earned by its ethanol operation costs taxpayers $30

One of the most politically charged debates in Washington revolves around business subsidies known as “corporate welfare.” A number of policy organizations have published studies examining the corporate welfare phenomenon: what qualifies as corporate welfare, how much it costs taxpayers, and how much it damages the economy. This study examines the dynamics of corporate welfare somewhat differently by investigating ADM as a classic case study of how those subsidies are obtained, how the welfare state encourages such “rent seeking,” and how such practices fundamentally corrupt the political life of a nation. Congress’s expressed desire to foster a free marketplace cannot be taken seriously until ADM’s corporate hand is removed from the federal till.

Introduction

ADM is certainly the nation’s most arrogant welfare recipient. And it is one of the few welfare recipients that spend millions of dollars each year advertising on Sunday morning television shows populated and watched by politicians. Chairman Dwayne Andreas’s and ADM’s success in farming Washington represents the rational result of contemporary government policies that turn elections into “an advanced auction of stolen goods,” as H. L. Mencken quipped. Thanks to its multi-million-dollar hustling in Washington, a company that lives and dies on the generosity of the American taxpayer has managed to get itself revered as a great public servant. Although ADM is not the only corporation with its hand out in Washington, it is easily one of the most successful beggars on the block.(1)

Andreas recently told a reporter for Mother Jones, “There isn’t one grain of anything in the world that is sold in a free market. Not one! The only place you see a free market is in the speeches of politicians. People who are not in the Midwest do not understand that this is a socialist country.”(2) Andreas’s comment about “no free markets” is like the old joke about the son who murdered his parents and then asked for the court’s mercy because he was an orphan. ADM champions political control over markets and then invokes that control as an excuse for its continued political manipulation. Andreas has exerted his influence in Washington to ensure that the U.S. form of “socialism” resembles 1930s’ Italian corporate statism: the government plunders the citizenry for the benefit of politically connected corporations. And, though Andreas does not like to admit it, there are many markets in the world for agricultural products that are not controlled by politicians.

I know it is from 1995 but what has changed in the past 13 years? They have gotten a whole lot bigger.

CES Is Not The Only Organization Critical Of Archer Daniels Midland – They can be so wrong in so many ways

Posted on January 7, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/cms/page1662.cfm

Download this page as a pdf Back to Hall of Shame homepage More on ADM *Corporate welfare and greenwashing *Corporate snapshot *Take actionMore info on ADM from Rainforest Action Network

Forests burn in Indonesia to make way for palm oil plantations. © Greenpeace / Daniel Beltrá

First the good news: burning ‘biodiesel’ fuels emits less global warming pollution than burning standard, oil-based gasoline.

Now the bad news: producing biofuels creates tons of global warming pollution – easily enough to offset any global warming benefits gained at the tail end of the process.

At least that’s the case when it comes to Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) and its business partners that manufacture and trade in Indonesian palm oil.

ADM is an agribusiness giant, and they’re a big player in the biodiesel business. A large part of the business relies on clearing Indonesia’s woodsy wetlands, or “peatlands,” to create palm plantations. The result? A whole lot of palm oil and a whole lot of resulting global warming pollution.

A 2007 Greenpeace report found that clearing, draining and setting fire to Indonesian peatlands emits 1.8 billion tons of carbon dioxide every year. That’s about four percent of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions. Roughly half of Indonesia’s peatlands have already been destroyed, helping Indonesia achieve a dubious ranking as the world’s third largest emitter of greenhouse gases, behind only China and the United States.[1]

But if this palm oil can be used instead of standard gasoline to fuel our cars, isn’t it worth it? Sadly no. Not by a long shot. According to Rainforest Action Network, “Producing palm oil, one of the most popular sources of biodiesel, entails so much deforestation that, over its lifecycle, palm-based biodiesel can emit up to ten times more carbon dioxide per gallon than gasoline.”[2]

ADM and its partners’ rampant destruction of Indonesian peatlands also threatens the existence of endangered species like the orangutan; a close relative of ours that scientists say could be wiped out by 2012 .[3]

Corporate welfare and greenwashing
ADM is a major player when it comes to influence in Washington, DC. Indeed, one of ADM’s largest supporters is the American taxpayer; the biofuels behemoth rakes in massive tax credits to subsidize its ethanol sales.[4]

Meanwhile, ADM is bending over backwards to present itself to the public as a friend of the environment. ADM’s company slogan is “Resourceful by Nature”, and its website extols its efforts to “develop nature-based alternatives to the world’s finite stores of fossil fuels.” Unfortunately, one of its alternatives is destroying an ecosystem and accelerating global warming.

Corporate snapshot
Founded in 1902 and incorporated in 1923, the Decatur, IL-headquartered ADM is one of the world’s largest processors of agricultural crops and a “world leader” in biodiesel fuels. [5]

According to Greenpeace, “global commodity traders including ADM-Kuok-Wilmar (ADM’s business alliance operating in Indonesia), Cargill, Golden Hope and Sinar Mas have commanding control over the entire palm oil supply chain – from plantations in Indonesia to refined vegetable oil or biofuel [processing facilities]. The alliance brings together Wilmar, the ‘largest palm biodiesel manufacturer in the world’, and ADM, the ‘world leader in renewable transport fuels’.
The ADM-Kuok-Wilmar alliance have ‘rapid expansion plans’ in relation to biodiesel. Between early 2006 and mid-2007, the ADM-Kuok-Wilmar alliance gained control of more than 1.4 million acres of peatland.[6]

There is a whole lot more. Please read the entire article and see who ADM pals around with in the rest of the Corporate Hall of Shame.

If Evolution Is True Why Doesn’t ADM Evolve – (creepy voice) Because it’s not alive!

Posted on January 6, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16347-review-iwhy-evolution-is-truei-by-jerry-coyne.html

Review: Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne

10:16 05 January 2009 by Rowan Hooper

T he first “why” that struck me on seeing Why Evolution is True was why do we need yet another book on evolution? There are lots of good ones out there already and nothing less than a mountain of evidence to support the reality of evolution by natural selection.

But we do need another, insists Jerry Coyne, a professor of evolutionary genetics at the University of Chicago, because creationism is spreading.

And he’s right – creationism is all over the place, not just in the US, where it often gains huge amounts of publicity. In December, a UK poll found that 29% of science teachers thought that creationism should be taught in science classes alongside evolution; a state of affairs that Richard Dawkins called “a national disgrace”. It is also on the rise in Islamic countries.

Careful persuasion

Creationism, Coyne tells us in this wide-ranging, beautifully written account, is like a roly-poly clown that pops back up when you punch it. But he resists the temptation to punch. He seeks to persuade, by carefully leading the reader through the overwhelming evidence, that evolution is a fact.

The audience is those who are uncertain about explanations of life’s diversity. The book is not aimed at people who hold faith-based positions – Coyne considers them to be lost causes – but you have to wonder how many people who are “uncertain” will be won over.

Coyne describes, for example, giving a talk on evolution versus intelligent design/creationism to a group of rich Chicago businessmen. You would think that people in the business world might think that evidence for something is worth taking into account, but this was the response Coyne got from one audience member after his lecture: “I found your evidence for evolution very convincing – but I still don’t believe it”.

So you would think that Archer Daniels Midland will evolve in this new Green World and “get it” that polluting the environment needs to stop. That their by-products as they call them must be put to a use. Like growing algae for a fuel source or making cement. But NO, they want to pump it underground. Like that’s not polluting. Why don’t they quit? Because as the man above said, “They don’t believe.”

illinois environmental protection agency

1021 north grand avenue east, P.O. Box 19276, springfield, illinois 62794-9276 -( 217) 782-3397 james R. thompson center, 100 west randolph, suite 11 -300, chicago, IL 60601 – (312) 814-6026

rod R. blagojevich, governor douglas P. scott, director

UNDERGROUND INJECTION CONTROL (UIC) FINAL PERMIT DECISION

The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency provides notice pursuant to 35 111. Admin. Code 705.201(c) that a final UIC permit was issued to Archer Daniels Midland Company of Decatur, Illinois on December 23, 2008. The Agency’s response to comments, the Response Summary and Attachment 1, are available at the Illinois EPA web site at the following link: http://www.epa.state.il.us/public-notices/general-notices.html (Scroll ^l/3 of the way down the page to select documents posted concerning the Archer Daniels Midland project.)

Specific information must be submitted to the Agency as either permit modification requests or as supplemental information for review and approval prior to ADM’s use of the injection well. Please review the lists of these data requirements on page 2 of the Response Summary.

The applicant may petition the Illinois Pollution Control Board to contest this permit decision pursuant to 35 111. Adm. Code 705.212. Third parties also have appeal rights pursuant to 35 111. Adm. Code 705.212. Appeals must be filed within 35 days of the decision date. The deadline to appeal the Illinois EPA permit decision is January 27, 2009. For additional information on the permit appeal process, please contact the Illinois Pollution Control Board (312-814-3620).

To receive a paper copy of the final UIC permit for ADM or the Illinois EPA Response Summary and Attachment 1, please contact:

Mara McGinnis

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency 1021 North Grand Avenue East Springfield, Illinois 62704-9276

Mara.McGinnis@illinois.gov 217/524-3288

rockford – 4302 North Main Street, Rockford, IL61103 -(815)987-7760 • des PLAINES-9511 W. Harrison St., Des Plaines, IL 60016 – (847) 294-4000

elgin – 595 South State, Elgin, IL 60123 – (847) 608-3131 • PEORIA-5415 N. University St., Peoria, IL 61614 – (309) 693-5463

bureau of land- peoria-7620 N. University St., Peoria, IL 61614 – (309) 693-5462 • champaign – 2125 South First Street, Champaign, IL 61820-(217) 278-5800 springfield – 4500 S. Sixth Street Rd., Springfield, IL 62706-(217) 786-6892 • collinsville – 2009 Mall Street, Collinsvilie, IL 62234-(618) 346-5120

marion – 2309 W. Main St., Suite 116, Marion, IL 62959 – (618) 993-7200

printed on recycled paper

Guess What? There isn’t a single environmental group in Illinois that is going to protest it.

Archer Daniels Midland Should Lead To The Future Not Repeat The Past – Deep well injection is so last century

Posted on January 5, 2009 by Doug Nicodemus

ADM just got their Permit to inject CO3 into Illinois’ soil. Why would they want to throw away the chance to produce the fuel of the future? They are so proud of it they want to spend 66 million $$$ of your money on it.

http://www.admworld.com/cgi-bin/search/naen/search.asp?Realm=Admworld_NAEN&Terms=deep%20well%20injection

ADM, MGSC and ISGS

Announce Carbon

Sequestration Project

Project to study

technology to reduce

greenhouse gas

emissions

Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM), the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC) and the Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS) announce that they are working together on a carbon sequestration project. The project will involve the capture and storage of carbon dioxide from ADM’s ethanol plant in Decatur, Illinois. In this project, carbon dioxide will be stored in the tiny spaces of porous rock deep below the Earth’s surface. This technology is one method of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by permanently storing carbon dioxide in the ground rather than releasing it into the atmosphere.

The project is designed to confirm the ability of the Mount Simon Sandstone, a major regional saline-water-bearing rock formation in Illinois, to accept and store 1 million tons of carbon dioxide over a period of three years. The carbon dioxide will be provided by ADM from its Decatur, Illinois, ethanol plant, and the project will be located on ADM’s Decatur property.

“Carbon sequestration is a promising technology to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Our goal for this project is to further demonstrate its safety and effectiveness,” said Robert Finley, director of the ISGS Energy and Earth Resources Center. “Deep saline rock formations, like the Mount Simon Sandstone, offer the greatest potential for sequestration of large volumes of carbon dioxide.”

“ADM is pleased to work with the geologists from the MGSC and ISGS, and be a part of this important, timely research,” said Dennis Riddle, ADM president, Corn Processing. “We see potential for carbon sequestration to improve the environmental footprint of biofuels by further reducing greenhouse gas emissions.”

Yet they could be doing this instead:

http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2009/01/02/science/975algae010109.txt

Trying to Turn San Diego into the Green Houston

Thursday, Jan. 1, 2009 | In the early 1990s, San Diego’s moribund economy was revived by a bunch of scientists who figured out how to do things like turn a mobile phone into a multi-media entertainment center and develop a diabetes therapy out of lizard spit.

Now, with the economy tanking again, another bunch of scientists is telling anyone who will listen that the region’s next economic boom might be borne out of pond scum.

Algae that is — green gold, San Diego soda.

San Diego, already home to dozens of companies involved in solar or wind energy, would be a major player in the nation’s multi-trillion-dollar energy economy if a group of local researchers succeed in turning algae into a commercially viable transportation fuel, something they think they can do within a decade.

“[It] is the scientific challenge of our generation,” said Stephen Mayfield, a cell biologist and associate dean at the Scripps Research Institute, referring to the need to cure America of its 200-billion-gallon-a-year oil addiction. “And algae is the answer.”

And a top-notch research infrastructure, a thriving biotech sector and proximity to cheap land in Imperial County, where the plant could be grown on a large scale with plenty of sun, combine to give San Diego a strong foundation for building on algae’s future.

Mayfield is one of several scientists at both Scripps institutions and the University of California, San Diego who are considered among the word’s foremost algae researchers. Other prominent names are Steve Kay, dean of the division of Biological Sciences at UCSD, and B. Gregory Mitchell, a biologist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

What Have Been The Top 10 Environmental Stories Over The Last Couple Of Years?

Posted on December 31, 2008 by Doug Nicodemus

Happy New Year Everyone! So how has the environment been doing lately?

Man Made Global Warming Is Not Happening – So these experts say

Posted on December 30, 2008 by Doug Nicodemus

Ah the liars strike back. SO TAKE THAT you you you environmentalists you.

http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/12/denialists_scraping_the_bottom.php#more

Denialists scraping the bottom of the barrel

Category: Global Warming
Posted on: December 28, 2008 10:22 AM, by Tim Lambert

You have to think that global warming denialist Matt Drudge must be getting desperate when he touts a column by Christopher “White asbestos is harmless” Booker arguing that winter has disproved man-made global warming:

First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.

But this time of the year you normally have the whole of Canada and half the US under snow. Look at the graph below from the Rutgers Global Snow Lab. If you move your mouse over it, it will show current snow cover. Not much different, is it?

Despite a strong La Nina this year, 2008 was nowhere near as cold as the years at the start of the 20th century.

So what’s the second part of Booker’s disproof of AGW?

Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a “scientific consensus” in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world’s most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that “consensus” which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.

OK, lets look at the list of “climate experts” who signed the Manhattan declaration. I don’t see many eminent climate scientists there. Of the 619 authors of the IPCC AR4 WG1, precisely zero signed the Manhattan declaration. There are a couple of eminent climate scientists there: Reid Bryson and Bill Gray, but the vast majority are not climate scientists at all, and the list includes entries like this:

John McLean, Climate Data Analyst, Post-graduate Diploma of Computer Studies, B. Arch., Climate Data Analyst, Computer scientist, Melbourne, Australia

Even if you repeat it, “Climate Data Analyst” is just a title he made up. Study the graphs above of climatic data. Congratulations! You’re analyzing climate data, so you can call yourself a Climate Data Analyst as well.

But Booker is a serious author right? Here is one of his little triumphs:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/3982101/2008-was-the-year-man-made-global-warming-was-disproved.html

I must end this year by again paying tribute to my readers for the wonderful generosity with which they came to the aid of two causes. First their donations made it possible for the latest “metric martyr”, the east London market trader Janet Devers, to fight Hackney council’s vindictive decision to prosecute her on 13 criminal charges, ranging from selling in pounds and ounces to selling produce “by the bowl” (to avoid using weights her customers dislike and don’t understand). The embarrassment caused by this historic battle has thrown the forced metrication policy of both our governments, in London and Brussels, into total disarray.

Since Hackney backed out of allowing four criminal charges against Janet to go before a jury next month, all that remains is for her to win her appeal in February against eight convictions which now look quite absurd (including those for selling veg by the bowl, as thousands of other London market traders do every day). The final goal, as Neil Herron of the Metric Martyrs Defence Fund insists, must then be a pardon for the late Steve Thoburn and the four other original “martyrs” who were found guilty in 2002 – after a legal battle also made possible by this column’s readers – of breaking laws so ridiculous that the EU Commission has even denied they existed (but which are still on the statute book).

The EVIL METRIC people must be defeated….HAHAHAHAHAHA

Energy Tax Credits For 2009 – The last parting shot from GWB

Posted on December 29, 2008 by Doug Nicodemus

http://www.ase.org/content/article/detail/2654

Energy-Efficiency Home

and Vehicle Tax Credits

Energy-Efficiency Home

and Vehicle Tax Credits

President Bush has signed into law new consumer tax credits for energy efficiency home improvements, as well as purchases of plug-in hybrid vehicles. These provisions were included in H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, which the president signed on October 3, 2008. The homeowner tax credits are largely the same – but not identical – to those that expired at the end of 2007, and begin again on January 1, 2009.

Taxpayers who claimed some but not all of the $500 federal income tax credit for energy efficiency home improvements that was in effect in tax years 2006 and 2007 may utilize the unused portion in 2009, the IRS has informed the Alliance to Save Energy. Please consult your tax advisor for details.

What’s New:

The consumer tax credits for energy-efficiency home improvements have been revived with a few tweaks for the calendar year 2009. To be eligible, most qualifying products must be purchased and installed between January 1 and December 31, 2009. There also are some new eligible products. Please see below for additional details. Efforts to have Congress further extend the consumer tax credits continue! This web page will be updated to reflect any new legislation.

Energy Efficiency Can Lower Your Federal Tax Bill as Well as Your Energy Bills

http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/incentive2.cfm?Incentive_Code=US41F&State=Federal¤tpageid=1&ee=1&re=1

Federal Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency

Energy-Efficient New Homes Tax Credit for Home Builders

Last DSIRE Review: 10/09/2008

Incentive Type:	Corporate Tax Credit
Eligible Efficiency Technologies:	Comprehensive Measures/Whole Building
Applicable Sectors:	Construction
Amount:	$1,000-$2,000, depending on energy savings and home type
Maximum Incentive:	$2,000
Website:	http://www.irs.gov/ businesses/small/industries/article/0,,id=155445,00.html
Authority 1:	26 USC § 45L
Date Enacted:	8/8/2005 (Amended 2008)
Effective Date:	1/1/2006
Expiration Date:	12/31/2009
Authority 2:	H.R. 1424: Div. B, Sec. 304 (The Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008)
Date Enacted:	10/3/2008
Expiration Date:	12/31/2009

http://www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/sfh/eem/eemhog96.cfm

Energy Efficient Mortgage

Home Owner Guide

THE ENERGY EFFICIENT MORTGAGE means comfort and savings. When you are buying, selling, refinancing, or remodeling your home, you can increase your comfort and actually save money by using the Energy Efficient Mortgage (EEM). It is easy to use, federally recognized, and can be applied to most home mortgages. EEMs provide the borrower with special benefits when purchasing a home that is energy efficient, or can be made efficient through the installation of energy-saving improvements.

Home owners with lower utility bills have more money in their pocket each month. They can afford to allocate a larger portion of their income to housing expenses. If you have more cash, why not buy a better, more comfortable home? There are two options with the Energy Efficient Mortgage.

The TWO SIDES of the EEM COIN

Finance Energy Improvements!

>	Cost-effective energy-saving measures may be financed as part of the mortgage!

Increase Your Buying Power!

>	Stretch debt-to-income qualifying ratios on loans for energy-efficient homes!

WHO BENEFITS from the ENERGY EFFICIENT MORTGAGE?

Buyers:

>	Qualify for a larger loan on a better home!

Sellers:

>	Sell your home more quickly.

Remodelers/Refinancers:

>	Get all the EEM benefits without moving.

Pay for energy improvements easily, through your mortgage. Your lender can increase your loan to cover energy improvement costs. Monthly mortgage payments increase slightly, but you actually save money because your energy bills will be lower!

HERS, or Home Energy Rating Systems

A HERS report is similar to a miles-per-gallon rating on a car. HERS are programs which provide evaluations of an individual home’s energy-efficiency. A HERS report is prepared by a trained Energy Rater. Factors such as insulation, appliance efficiencies, window types, local climate, and utility rates are used to rate the home and calculate energy costs.

A HERS Report Includes:

>	Overall Rating Score of the house as it is.

Rating scores are between 1 and 100. Higher scores indicate greater efficiency. Cost-effective upgrades are those which will save more money through energy savings than they cost to install.

U.S. Department of Energy recommended Home Energy Ratings contain a numerical score from 1 to 100, a one to five star-plus rating, and the estimated energy costs. Higher scores indicate greater efficiency. Cost-effective upgrades are those which will save more money through energy savings than they cost to install.

A HERS rating usually costs between $300 and $800. This could be paid for by the buyer, seller, lender, or real estate agent. Sometimes the cost of the rating may be financed as part of the mortgage. No matter how the rating is paid for, it is a very good investment because an EEM could save you or your buyer hundreds of dollars each year.

Seems like a lot doesn’t? The boat has a hole in it and he hands us 3 buckets. That is a recipe for one sunk boat.