Green Environment

Rep. Lamar Smith, the new chair of the House Science and Technology Committee, wrote an op-ed in today’s Washington Post that contains several misrepresentations of fact. He argued for increased fossil fuel production, against the scientific consensus that humans cause climate change, and for a “wait-and-see” approach to cutting carbon emissions. Below is a fact check on the seven worst parts. It is worth noting that just two years ago, the Washington Post’s Editorial Page Editor wrote “The GOPs climate-change denial may be its most harmful delusion.” Apparently it is a delusion the WashPost is happy to spread. Integrity of Climate Science Smith opened with a general appeal for a clear discussion of the facts: “Climate change is an issue that needs to be discussed thoughtfully and objectively. Unfortunately, claims that distort the facts hinder the legitimate evaluation of policy options.” However, with a look at his record, Rep. Smith did not have such a clear discussion in mind. After he became chair of the science committee, his first move was to schedule a hearing that aimed to take issue with the science of climate change. He has criticized “the idea of human-made global warming.” More dangerously, he has made headlines for authoring legislation that would politicize research conducted by the National Science Foundation. Of course, there is strong, 97%-grade consensus on human-caused climate change in the scientific literature, as a recent study confirmed. Keystone Claims With the House set to vote on Wednesday to force the approval of the Keystone tar sands pipeline, Rep. Smith argued that opposition to the Keystone tar sands pipeline hurts the economy and would not decrease carbon emissions. He said the “State Department has found that the pipeline will have minimal impact on the surrounding environment and no significant effect on the climate,” and would create “more than 40,000 U.S. jobs.” This just isn’t true. The Environmental Protection Agency submitted a public comment on the State Department’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement, finding that, among other things, State needs to make revisions on the true impact of the project’s carbon emissions and about how dirty tar sands oil truly is. Additionally, tar sands oil extraction is not inevitable because transporting it by rail is not feasible — the pipeline is really their only option. Smith’s claims about 40,000 jobs are also quite inflated. The project would create just 35 permanent jobs, along with 51 coal plants’ worth of carbon dioxide each year. U.S. Emissions Smith went on to argue “that U.S. emissions contribute very little to global concentrations of greenhouse gas.” In fact, annual U.S. carbon emissions rank just behind China’s, despite having only a quarter of China’s population. The U.S. is by far the world’s biggest contributor to global concentrations of CO2, the main greenhouse gas, since that depends on cumulative emissions. Despite advances in energy efficiency and renewable energy, the United States remains a significant part of overall global carbon emissions. Domestic coal use is on the rise again in the U.S., and coal exports reached a record high last year, beating the record set in 1981. America is also the world’s number one fossil fuel subsidizer. Recent Warming Rep. Smith made the case that “global temperatures have held steady over the past 15 years, despite rising greenhouse gas emissions.” This is simply not the case. The overall trend line shows continued warming. 2010 was the hottest year on record. Every year of the decades of the 2000′s was warmer than the average temperature in the ’90s. Superstorm Sandy The Chair of the House Science Committee called out “unscientific and often hyperbolic claims” about the impacts of a warming climate. He cited experts

Independent Science News reports on how Monsanto is influencing peer-reviewed scientific journals: by Claire Robinson and Jonathan Latham, PhD Richard Smith, former editor of the British Medical Journal, has jested that instead of scientific peer review, its rival The Lancet had a system of throwing a pile of papers down the stairs and publishing those that reached the bottom. On another occasion, Smith was challenged to publish an issue of the BMJ exclusively comprising papers that had failed peer review and see if anybody noticed. He replied, “How do you know I haven’t already done it?” As Smith’s stories show, journal editors have a lot of power in science – power that provides opportunities for abuse. The life science industry knows this, and has increasingly moved to influence and control science publishing. Richard E Goodman, University of Nebraska The strategy, often with the willing cooperation of publishers, is effective and sometimes blatant. In 2009, the scientific publishing giant Elsevier was found to have invented an entire medical journal, complete with editorial board, in order to publish papers promoting the products of the pharmaceutical manufacturer Merck. Merck provided the papers, Elsevier published them, and doctors read them, unaware that the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine was simply a stuffed dummy. Fast forward to September 2012, when the scientific journal Food and Chemical Toxicology (FCT) published a study that caused an international storm (Séralini, et al. 2012). The study, led by Prof Gilles-Eric Séralini of the University of Caen, France, suggested a Monsanto genetically modified (GM) maize, and the Roundup herbicide it is grown with, pose serious health risks. The two-year feeding study found that rats fed both suffered severe organ damage and increased rates of tumors and premature death. Both the herbicide (Roundup) and the GM maize are Monsanto products. Corinne Lepage, France’s former environment minister, called the study “a bomb”. Subsequently, an orchestrated campaign was launched to discredit the study in the media and persuade the journal to retract it. Many of those who wrote letters to FCT (which is published by Elsevier) had conflicts of interest with the GM industry and its lobby groups, though these were not publicly disclosed. The journal did not retract the study. But just a few months later, in early 2013 the FCT editorial board acquired a new “Associate Editor for biotechnology”, Richard E. Goodman. This was a new position, seemingly established especially for Goodman in the wake of the “Séralini affair”. Richard E. Goodman is professor at the Food Allergy Research and Resource Program, University of Nebraska. But he is also a former Monsanto employee, who worked for the company between 1997 and 2004. While at Monsanto he assessed the allergenicity of the company’s GM crops and published papers on its behalf on allergenicity and safety issues relating to GM food (Goodman and Leach 2004). Goodman had no documented connection to the journal until February 2013. His fast-tracked appointment, directly onto the upper editorial board raises urgent questions. Does Monsanto now effectively decide which papers on biotechnology are published in FCT? And is this part of an attempt by Monsanto and the life science industry to seize control of science? To equate one journal with “science” may seem like an exaggeration. But peer-reviewed publication, in the minds of most scientists, is science. Once a paper is published in an academic journal it enters the canon and stands with the discovery of plate tectonics or the structure of DNA. All other research, no matter how groundbreaking or true, is irrelevant. As a scientist once scathingly said of the “commercially confidential” industry safety data that underpin approvals of chemicals and GM foods, “If it isn’t published, it doesn’t exist.” Goodman’s ILSI links The industry affiliations of FCT’s new gatekeeper for biotechnol

Indian Country reports: ICTMN Staff May 17, 2013 Elders and chiefs of at least 10 sovereign nations walked out of a meeting with U.S. State Department officials in Rapid City, South Dakota, on Thursday May 16 in which the government was attempting to engage in tribal consultation over the Keystone XL pipeline. Deeming the meeting “invalid,” leaders of the Great Plains Tribal Chairmen’s Association—attendees included the Southern Ponca of Oklahoma, Pawnee Nation, Nez Perce Nation, Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate, Ihanktonwan Dakota Yankton Sioux, Rosebud Sioux Tribe, Oglala Sioux Tribe, Standing Rock Tribe, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and Crow Creek Sioux Tribe—said they would meet only with President Barack Obama to discuss the pipeline. The Great Plains Tribal Chairman’s Association is made up of the 16 tribal chairmen, presidents and chairpersons in North Dakota, South Dakota and Nebraska who have joined to defend treaty rights, according to the group. In January they along with other tribes signed the International Treaty to Protect the Sacred Against the Tar Sands. (Related: Tribal Members Sign Treaty Calling for an End to Alberta Oil Sands Development and Keystone XL) Keystone XL would carry up to 800,000 barrels daily of viscous crude known as bitumen from the Alberta oil sands of Canada for 1,700 miles down to the Gulf of Mexico coast in Texas. Obama is slated to make a decision on the $7 billion project sometime this year, perhaps as early as the end of summer. (Related: U.S. Senate Endorses Keystone XL 62–37 in Symbolic, Non-Binding Vote) The chiefs join the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), which two weeks ago released its public comments on the pipeline’s draft environmental assessment report, recommending that the Obama administration reject the pipeline proposal from TransCanada if certain concerns could not be adequately addressed. (Related: Fill Gaps in Keystone XL Draft Environment Report or Reject Pipeline, NCAI Tells Obama Administration) The state department received more than a million public comments by the April 22 deadline, which was coincidentally Earth Day, most of them against the project. (Related: Anti-Keystone XL Tribal Members Urge Fellow Natives to Comment on Environmental Impact Statement) The government’s own Environmental Protection Agency has weighed in against the environmental draft report, which was released on March 1. On April 22 the EPA objected to the review, saying more study was needed of greenhouse gas emissions, the potential effect of spills, and the route through ecologically sensitive territory, the Washington Post reported. (Related: State Department Draft Environmental Report Says Keystone XL Effects on Both Climate Change and Oil Supply Would Be Minimal) They contended that tribes had not been consulted as the report stated they had, and took issue with the report’s assessment that the pipeline would have little to no impact on climate change. (Related: Exaggerated Consultation Claims, Factual Errors in State Department’s Keystone XL Environment Report Rankle Natives) “The standard for consultation with indigenous nations is described as ‘government to government,’ and that standard must not be treated lightly,” said Jennifer Baker, a Denver-based attorney who works with the Great Plains tribes, to Native News Network after the chiefs’ walkout. “The duty to engage with tribes in this manner stems from treaties and the constitution, and it has been expanded upon through court decisions and executive orders.” Consultation or no, the Native leaders who left the meeting issued a statement objecting on multiple grounds. “On this historic day of May 16, 2013, ten sovereign Indigenous nations maintain that the proposed TransCanada/Keystone XL pipeline does not serve the national interest and in fact would be detrimental not only to the collected sovereigns but all future generations on planet earth. This morning the following sovereigns informed the Departmen

Florida has a long list of problematic invasive species, from the vervet monkey to the lionfish, but the Burmese python might be the state's public enemy No. 1 — so much so that residents will hop out of their cars at night to catch one double the normal size.

Just as dogs aid military personnel on land, dolphins assist in naval operations. The United States Navy trains bottlenose dolphins to seek out sea mines and identify enemy divers, but once in a while, these intelligent creatures find something even more exciting: a piece of American history.

Check for a coop tour in your area. There’s a list here. Here’s a report on Raleigh, North Carolina’s, from newsobserver.com: These models, covered in feathers, strutting down runways and largely ignoring their gawking admirers, were featured attractions Saturday along with their elaborate homes in the Tour D’Coop, a benefit for Urban Ministries of Wake County that capitalizes on the popularity of backyard chicken houses. On the tour, chicken fanciers could visit birds – once known strictly as farm animals – living the high life. A coop that looked like a schoolhouse, another built with recycled materials, and another billed as a “mini atrium” were on the tour that also offered a look at urban and suburban sustainable gardening. Children who visited one of the Raleigh coops at Greta and Gray Modlin’s home close to Capital Boulevard got to feed their chickens and ogle the orange koi fish in the backyard pond while their parents checked out the coop, the beehive and the garden. Chickens are all-purpose pets, said owner Greta Modlin. They produce food, weed the yard, help keep snakes away and make great material for compost that’s used in the garden. She lets the chickens run around the backyard while she gardens. “They’re chuckling and cooing and very enjoyable to be around,” she said. Gray Modlin, an engineer and professional chef, designed and built the coop, which has a big picture window in front. He used to use some of his chickens’ eggs at the Raleigh restaurant he owned. “I still eat the eggs every day,” he said “They have become like pets almost.” Some people eat the chickens when they stop laying, he said, but “I don’t think we’ll be eating ours.” The tour, which attracted about 1,000 people, has its origins in an event eight years ago when a group of neighbors in Raleigh’s Five Points neighborhood wanted to put their chickens and henhouses on display, said M’Liss Koopman, the Tour D’Coop chairwoman. Some years ago, Whole Foods became a sponsor. The tour has grown to 21 coops this year and included Cary coops for the first time. The town voted last year to allow backyard chickens. Koopman first bought chickens home a year after she went on the tour. Chickens are friendly and curious, she said. When they live outside the confines of a factory, chickens are able to express a broad range of behaviors. “They’re great, low-maintenance pets,” she said. Money from ticket sales goes to Urban Ministries. The organization runs the second-largest food pantry in Wake County, said Dr. Peter Morris, executive director. The tour helps highlight sustainability and the nonprofit’s move from processed to more fresh foods. “You can actually do farm-to-fork in your own neighborhood,” he said. “Chickens and gardens are good urban agriculture. Folks are very proud of their coops.” Teaching children about animals is one of the motivations for owning chickens. Nine-year-old Caswell Choi’s parents call him “the chicken whisperer” because he can distinguish among their pet chickens that look remarkably alike and knows all their habits. He poked around the chicken enclosure in his family’s Raleigh backyard while the birds flocked at his feet. Chicken owners say the birds have distinctive personalities, and it’s easy to tell which is at the top of the pecking order. Caswell said his favorite among the birds is Goldie, because she’s mean. “When she gets angry, she’ll hiss at you,” he said. Caswell’s mother, Anna Choi, said the family got chicks about a year ago. She’d been on the tour and thought owning chickens might be fun for her children. “It was kind of kooky, but not bad kooky,” she said. And the neighbors get free eggs in the summer. Her husband, a former architecture student, designed the coop with large windows that are painted to match the house. One of the best things about having chickens is the fresh eggs, said Lynn and Jim O’Brien, new chicken owners in Cary. Their coop wasn’t featured on the tour, but they were visi

Common Dreams posts: Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New ‘Highly Toxic’ Pesticide Green group: ‘The EPA continues to put industry interests first to exacerbate an already dire pollinator crisis.’ - Lauren McCauley, staff writer Despite new findings that prove a heightened crisis in US bee populations and a recent ban in Europe on similar chemical applications, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has decided to further endanger the population Monday by approving a “highly toxic” new pesticide. (Photo: MightyBoyBrian/ Flickr) The “EPA continues to put industry interests first to exacerbate an already dire pollinator crisis,” writes the group Beyond Pesticides. The agency granted sulfoxaflor, a product of the Dow Chemical Company, “unconditional registration” for use on vegetables, fruits, barley, canola, ornamentals, soybeans and wheat among others, despite the EPA’s own classification of the insecticide as “highly toxic to honey bees.” According to the Washington Examiner, the EPA’s studies on the chemical’s long-term effect on bees proved to be “inconclusive due to some issues with the study designs” and thus the EPA has proposed simply reducing the amount applied. As part of their decision, the EPA approved new language for the sulfoxaflor labels which reads, “Do not apply this product at any time between 3 days prior to bloom and until after petal fall,” during heightened pollinator activity. Further, they approved an additional ‘advisory pollinator statement’: Notifying known beekeepers within 1 mile of the treatment area 48 hours before the product is applied will allow them to take additional steps to protect their bees. Also limiting application to times when managed bees and native pollinators are least active, e.g., before 7 am or after 7pm local time or when temperature is below 55oF at the site of application, will minimize risk to bees. Though the EPA believes this advisory to be “robust” enough to protect pollinators, environmental advocacy groups such as Beyond Pesticides believe such statements “not only underscore the risks to bees” but prove to be unrealistic since systemic pesticides, including sulfoxaflor, “continue to exist in the plant (including pollen and nectar) for longer periods of time that well surpasses the recommended application intervals, and therefore expose bees to residues longer than suggested.” And, in addition to harming bees, sulfoxaflor has been known to cause tumors and carcinomas in mice and rats and has been classified as “suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential.” Dismissing these concerns, the EPA alternately points to the “need for sulfoxaflor by industry and agriculture groups to control insects no longer being controlled by increasingly ineffective pesticide technologies,” proving the ongoing and harmful nature of unsustainable techniques such as pesticide sprays. Following Europe’s announcement last week that they would suspend the use of bee-harming neonicotinoids in an effort to combat the rampant colony collapse crisis, many hoped the US would announce similar reforms. However, following this week’s announcement, groups say it is clear the EPA will continue pursue an “irresponsible” and “counter-intuitive” agenda in regards to bee health and the environment. _____________________ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

Every time Los Angeles exhales, odd-looking gadgets anchored in the mountains above the city trace the invisible puffs of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases that waft skyward. Halfway around the globe, similar contraptions atop the Eiffel Tower and elsewhere around Paris keep a pulse on emissions from smokestacks and automobile tailpipes. And there is talk of outfitting Sao Paulo, Brazil, with sensors that sniff the byproducts of burning fossil fuels. It’s part of a budding effort to track the carbon footprints of megacities, urban hubs with over 10 million people that are increasingly responsible for human-caused global warming. For years, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse pollutants have been closely monitored around the planet by stations on the ground and in space. Last week, worldwide levels of carbon dioxide reached 400 parts per million at a Hawaii station that sets the global benchmark , a concentration not seen in millions of years. via Project aims to track big city carbon footprints.

GMO giants DuPont have contracted dozens of retired law enforcement officers to begin patrolling farms in the US next year to spot any potential intellectual property theft. DuPont Co, the second-largest seed country in the world, is hoping to find farmers that have purchased contracts to use their genetically modified soybean seeds but have breached the terms of agreement by illegally using the product for repeat harvests. Should farmers replant GMO seeds licensed by DuPont, they could be sued for invalidating their contracts. “Farmers are never going to get cheap access to these genetically engineered varieties,” Charles Benbrook, a research professor at Washington State University’s Center for Sustaining Agriculture and Natural Resources, tells Bloomberg. “The biotech industry has trumped the legitimate economic interests of the farmer again by raising the ante on intellectual property.” via GMO giant hires retired cops to hunt down farmers — RT USA.

From the depths of the Javan jungle to the towns of the Northeastern United States – mysterious winged creatures can be found in local legends all over the world. This is just a brief summary, please visit Environmental Graffiti to see the full, formatted version of the article