Latest Articles

With the right rules in place, it could work

Working Assets is my long-distance phone company. I love it dearly for its combination of business efficiency, social responsibility and progressive politics.

Each month, my phone bill carries alerts that urge me to take action on a specific issue or two. Recent Citizen Actions suggest the gravity of the issues chosen: "Save Our Constitution," "Impeach Dick Cheney," "Close Guantanamo."

This month Working Assets urged me to "Say No to Ethanol."

How did the use of ethanol end up alongside tyranny and torture as an evil to be conquered?

A couple of years ago, I was waiting my turn to speak to a well-attended California conference on alternative fuels. For this gathering, alternative fuels included natural gas, clean diesel, fossil fueled derived hydrogen, coal-fired electricity, as well as wind energy and biofuels. The leadoff speaker, from the California Energy Commission, spoke warmly about all the alternative fuels under discussion. Except one. When it came to ethanol, he visualized his perspective with the metaphor of a giant hypodermic needle from Midwest corn farmers to California drivers. For him and, I suspect, most of California's state government, ethanol belongs in the same category as heroin.

In the late 1990s, the nation discovered that MTBE, a widely used gasoline additive made of natural gas and petroleum-derived isobutylene was polluting ground water. The environmental community largely defended its continued use and vigorously opposed substituting ethanol. One well-respected New England environmental coalition raised the possibility that ethanol blends could cause fetal alcohol syndrome. Fill up your gas tank with 10 percent ethanol and your baby could be alcoholic, their report warned.

In the last few years, the environmental position has shifted from an attack on ethanol from any source to an attack on corn and corn-derived ethanol. The assault on corn comes from so many directions that sometimes the arguments are wildly contradictory. In an article published in the New York Times Magazine earlier this year Michael Pollan, an excellent and insightful writer, argues that cheap corn is the key to the epidemic of obesity. The same month, Foreign Affairs published an article by two distinguished university professors who argued that the use of ethanol has led to a runup in corn prices that threatens to sentence millions more to starvation.

Ethanol is not a perfect fuel. Corn is far from a perfect fuel crop. We should debate their imperfections. But we should also keep in mind the first law of ecology. "There is no such thing as a free lunch." Tapping into any energy source involves tradeoffs.

Yet when it comes to ethanol, and corn, we accept no tradeoffs. In 30 years in the business of alternative energy, I've never encountered the level of animosity generated by ethanol, not even in the debate about nuclear power. When it comes to ethanol, we seem to apply a different standard than we do when we evaluate other fuels.

Disagreement over threat to national security

Cape Wind claims to have cleared another hurdle today. From their press release:

Today's Department of Defense (DOD) report is good news for Cape Wind. The report clearly finds Cape Wind to be outside of the wind-turbine offset zone being proposed for PAVE PAWS radar systems.

Now the DOD has reached the same determination as the U.S. Air Force -- that Cape Wind will not negatively impact the Air Force PAVE PAWS radar system. This report puts to rest in a final form any reasonable concern about this issue.

The reality is that projects like Cape Wind strengthen national security by making America more energy independent and less reliant on foreign sources of energy.

That's not how the Alliance for Nantucket Sound sees it, unsurprisingly, claiming that this report is final proof that the turbines would threaten missile defense systems and therefore, national security.

These two just can't agree on anything.

Even USDA researchers are a bit creeped out by corporate control of food

Food production and retailing have gotten so squarely under the heel of a few corporations that even the USDA is raising an eyebrow. At the top, the agency teems with PR flacks for the agribusiness giants. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t competent researchers among the rank and file. One of them, Steven W. Martinez, […]

And not just for S&M types either

Finally, someone figures out that tax policy is actually sexy!

More than meets the eye

If you think that the current governmental and corporate interest in ethanol has something to do with global warming, think again. It is dawning on the U.S. government that (1) most of the remaining supplies of oil are in unfriendly hands, and (2) that there isn't enough oil remaining to feed a constantly growing global demand.

With oil production plateauing, governments can turn to three main strategies to maintain fuel supplies: (1) consume what's left of the planet by growing huge amounts of biofuels; (2) fry what's left of the atmosphere by converting coal to oil or exploiting dirty, expensive tars and oil sands; or (3) conquer the planet to forcably take whatever oil is left.

Michael T. Klare brings this problem right to the door of the U.S. military in his new article, "The Pentagon v. Peak Oil: How Wars of the Future May Be Fought Just to Run the Machines That Fight Them."

North Pacific Fishery Management Council protects seafloor habitat areas in Bering Sea

It's official -- and unanimous. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council voted to ban bottom trawling of some 180,000 square miles of previously unexploited ocean floor in the Bering Sea, particularly in the North.

The area is home to 26 species of marine mammals, including whales and walruses, as well as 450 species of fish and million of seabirds that flock to the region from all seven continents.

At a Bonnaroo press conference

I just left the first press conference of Bonnaroo where hiphop-funk-reggae guru Michael Franti of Spearhead set the stage by explaining his routine when coming to Bonnaroo: "The first thing I always do is go over to the port-a-potty, because you can tell what stage the festival is in …" The man speaks the truth. […]

What a nice idea

If Gandhi were around today, I think he would be less reasonable and tractable about the climate crisis; instead, he would challenge the moral integrity of so-called western civilization. The galvanizing march to the salt flats (the famous "Salt March") would be a tour of threatened island nations: Inuit seeking redress for loss of habitat, mountain people facing bewildering change, deluges in Bangladesh, landslides in the Philippines, and masses of people in the Indus-Ganges-Yangtze river basins facing an uncertain future over water supplies. It would be a march to bear witness to the moral wrongness that pervades the fossil-fuel civilization. It would not, my fellow environmentalists, be the image of a stranded polar bear, regardless of how signatory a phenomena.

Record a message to the candidates about warming; win prizes

If you had 30 seconds on camera to convince the presidential candidates to take global warming seriously, what would you say? How would you say it? Would you sing? Use visual aides? Do it in the buff? Why not give it a whirl? LCV is having a Hot Spot Contest, gathering 30 second videos from […]

There oughta be a law: Off means off

Here's why you need to put all your electronics on power strips/surge protectors; so you can actually turn them off and save the massive amounts of energy these vampires suck out of the system (and your wallet).

We need a law that says by 2009 no new electronic devices can be sold without a hard off setting that actually turns the device entirely off (i.e., no current drain whatsoever). It's not hard -- it's how everything used to work.