pollution

If Polluter’s Lobbyists Were Asthmatic Children

A new ad by the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council poses the question: What if you replace Congress’ polluter lobbyists with asthmatic children? “If every polluter’s lobbyist around Congress was suddenly replaced by severely asthmatic children, then maybe Congress wouldn’t always be trying to gut clean air standards,” a narrator says. The ad buy raises awareness about the EPA’s new standards for carbon pollution from power plants and celebrates the upcoming release of the rule, which has been under review for four months.

Watch it:

Big Oil Pumps More Than $1.2 Million Into Romney Super PAC

Coal, oil, and gas companies have contributed at least $1.2 million to Restore Our Future, the super PAC supporting Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, a ThinkProgress Green analysis reveals.

The super PAC Restore Our Future has fundraised $30 million to Romney to the White House. The super PAC spent $800,000 on pro-Romney ads, but it has flooded his Republican opponents with attack ads totaling 17 million. Restore Our Future’s war chest comes from under 200 donors, 85 percent of whom had already donated the maximum amount to the Romney campaign.

Romney’s campaign has raised at least $500,000 from the oil and gas industry, according to Open Secrets. But his super PAC allows special interests another chance to exert their influence. While many of the super PAC’s donors come from the financial sector, coal, oil, and gas have also flocked to Restore Our Future:

Coal mining:
– Oxbow Carbon:$750,000

– Oxbow President Bill Koch: $250,000

– Consol Energy: $150,000

Oil and Gas:
– Ballard Exploration: $25,000

– Bassoe Offshore President Jonathan Fairbanks: $25,000

– Murphy Wade of Murphy Oil Corporation: $15,000

– Joseph Grigg of American Energy Operations: $5,000

– Total for oil, gas, and coal: $1,220,000

In total, coal, oil, and gas companies contributed at least $1.2 million to Restore Our Future’s $18 million haul in the last half of 2011. The coal company Oxbow Carbon, alone, contributed $1 million, including a $250,000 donation from billionaire Oxbow CEO Bill Koch — the brother of oil billionaires Charles and David of Koch Industries.

With Perry out of the race, Romney has received more money from mining and oil than any other presidential candidate. The pro-Perry super PAC “Make Us Great Again” took in an outstanding $1.3 million from oil companies and executives during the last six months of his run.

Although Restore Our Future has no “formal” ties to the candidate, the donations reflect Romney’s right pivot on energy and climate concerns. The Massachusetts governor that once supported regulations on coal pollution, has since questioned whether carbon is even dangerous. In addition to becoming a climate denier, he now blasts government support for cleaner energy — despite creating a state green fund as governor.

You can expect Romney to sound suspiciously like his rich polluting backers, as dirty money continues to flood Restore Our Future and Romney’s campaign stash.

Big Oil Pumps More Than $1.2 Million Into Romney Super PAC

Coal, oil, and gas companies have contributed at least $1.2 million to Restore Our Future, the super PAC supporting Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, a ThinkProgress Green analysis reveals.

The super PAC Restore Our Future has fundraised $30 million to Romney to the White House. The super PAC spent $800,000 on pro-Romney ads, but it has flooded his Republican opponents with attack ads totaling 17 million. Restore Our Future’s war chest comes from under 200 donors, 85 percent of whom had already donated the maximum amount to the Romney campaign.

Romney’s campaign has raised at least $500,000 from the oil and gas industry, according to Open Secrets. But his super PAC allows special interests another chance to exert their influence. While many of the super PAC’s donors come from the financial sector, coal, oil, and gas have also flocked to Restore Our Future:

Coal mining:
– Oxbow Carbon:$750,000

– Oxbow President Bill Koch: $250,000

– Consol Energy: $150,000

Oil and Gas:
– Ballard Exploration: $25,000

– Bassoe Offshore President Jonathan Fairbanks: $25,000

– Murphy Wade of Murphy Oil Corporation: $15,000

– Joseph Grigg of American Energy Operations: $5,000

– Total for oil, gas, and coal: $1,220,000

In total, coal, oil, and gas companies contributed at least $1.2 million to Restore Our Future’s $18 million haul in the last half of 2011. The coal company Oxbow Carbon, alone, contributed $1 million, including a $250,000 donation from billionaire Oxbow CEO Bill Koch — the brother of oil billionaires Charles and David of Koch Industries.

With Perry out of the race, Romney has received more money from mining and oil than any other presidential candidate. The pro-Perry super PAC “Make Us Great Again” took in an outstanding $1.3 million from oil companies and executives during the last six months of his run.

Although Restore Our Future has no “formal” ties to the candidate, the donations reflect Romney’s right pivot on energy and climate concerns. The Massachusetts governor that once supported regulations on coal pollution, has since questioned whether carbon is even dangerous. In addition to becoming a climate denier, he now blasts government support for cleaner energy — despite creating a state green fund as governor.

You can expect Romney to sound suspiciously like his rich polluting backers, as dirty money continues to flood Restore Our Future and Romney’s campaign stash.

George Allen Named To ‘Dirty Dozen’ List

The League of Conservation Voters has reserved the first spot on its yearly “Dirty Dozen” list for Virginia Senate candidate George Allen (R), who has “one of the worst environmental records ever.” Since leaving the Senate, Allen has become an oil lobbyist, helping earn him his spot. This is his third time making the Dirty Dozen.

L.A. Times: Earth’s Top 10 Biggest Enemies in Congress

Republicans launched an unprecedented frontal assault against environmental protections and regulations this year, prompting Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) to call his chamber “the most anti-environment House in history.” Here are the 10 most powerful and outspoken opponents of clean air, clean water, conservation and climate action.

That’s the Los Angeles Times editorial board opening its “Year in Review: Congress’ 10 biggest enemies of the Earth,” what they call “Observations and provocations from The Times’ Opinion staff.”

Here are the opponents 10 to 8:

10. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. Thought to be the biggest lifetime recipient of oil-industry contributions in the Senate, Cornyn has rewarded Exxon-Mobil’s largesse by supporting the industry’s position on pretty much every energy or environmental issue that has ever appeared before him. That’s why he, like everyone on this list, has a “0″ on the League of Conservation Voters’ scorecard for pro-environment votes.

9. Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska. A tireless advocate for opening Alaska’s pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, Young was involved in one of the more entertaining name-calling spats in Congress this year when he got into a tiff over the refuge with author and professor Doug Brinkley. You can be the judge of who won by watching the video replay.

8. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista [CA]. There may have been a time when the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee lived up to its name, investigating and bringing to light incidents of government waste, fraud and abuse. But I can’t remember back that far. In recent decades it has served as a tool for the majority party in the House to bash and embarrass the presidential administration, at least during times such as now when the House isn’t controlled by the president’s party. Issa, the committee’s current chairman, has turned such political gamesmanship into an art form, and has been particularly keen to attack environmental regulators and policymakers. In so doing he has turned up precious little waste or fraud, but provided plenty of political theater for those who want to dismantle the Environmental Protection Agency or end subsidies for clean energy.

Here are the worst 7:

7. Rep. Bob Latta, R-Ohio. Latta has the distinction of sponsoring the most far-reaching and destructive amendment to the most egregious anti-environment bill passed by the House this year. The TRAIN Act, approved by the House in September but not expected to get through the Senate, is a breathtaking (literally) gift to polluters that creates a committee to study the costs but ignore the benefits of environmental regulation, while also blocking EPA efforts to crack down on deadly emissions from power plants. Latta’s contribution is an amendment that undermines a cornerstone of the Clean Air Act, requiring the EPA to take industry costs into account when setting health-based standards. This would allow corporate polluters to overrule scientists and strikes at the heart of the polluter-pays principle that has guided environmental policy for 40 years.

6. Rep. Edward Whitfield, R-Ky. Another architect of the TRAIN wreck, Whitfield offered an amendment that would block the EPA from regulating mercury and other toxics from power plants, and from coming up with a rule on smog and soot that crosses state lines. Together, these two regulations would save an estimated 51,000 lives per year. But what are a few thousand lives when utility profits are at stake?

5. Sen. James M. Inhofe, R-Okla. One of the most outspoken climate-change deniers in the Senate (he’s renowned for calling global warming “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people”), Inhofe is also one of the most influential Republicans in the country when it comes to environmental policy. As ranking member of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, he uses his position to push for expanded oil drilling and reduce environmental regulation. Inhofe sometimes even finds himself to the right of the polluter-packed U.S. Chamber of Commerce; this summer he placed a hold on President Obama’s nominee John Bryson as Commerce secretary, even though Bryson had the blessing of the Chamber, because Inhofe felt Bryson was too pro-environment.

4. Rep. Michael Simpson, R-Idaho. Simpson has stepped to the front lines of his party’s war on Mother Nature by adding dozens of anti-environment riders to must-pass budget legislation. Among other things, Simpson aims to let mountaintop coal-mining operations continue to pollute streams, prevent the EPA from regulating coal-ash disposal, and exempt pesticide sprayers from complying with the Clean Water Act.

3. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. The enforcer of Republican Party discipline, Senate Minority Leader McConnell is among the key architects of his party’s stance on environmental issues. In 2009, when Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina was among the few Republicans willing to discuss a bipartisan climate bill with Democrats, it was McConnell who reportedly convinced him to back away. This spring he led a failed effort to block the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions and overrule its finding that climate change threatens public health — tantamount to a statement that politicians know more about the dangers of climate change than scientists.

2. Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va. The House Majority Leader released a memo in late August listing the top 10 “job-destroying regulations” his party would battle in the remainder of the congressional session. Seven were environmental rules opposed by the fossil fuel industry, including restrictions on emissions from industrial boilers and cement plants, and proposed rulemaking on smog, farm soot and greenhouse gases. None of these rules really threaten jobs, but failing to approve them would certainly threaten lives.

1. Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich. As chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Upton is the gatekeeper for many of the disastrous anti-environment bills that have been approved or proposed in the House this year. Ironically, he was once known among his state’s conservatives as “Red Fred” because of a somewhat pro-environment voting record, but a recent electoral challenge from his right changed all that. Because of his powerful position and newfound disdain for green regulation, he represents one of the biggest threats to planet Earth on planet Earth.

While International Negotiators Deal with China’s Carbon, Chinese Citizens Deal With Impacts Closer to Home

by Melanie Hart and Tong Zhao

Many eyes are on the international climate negotiations in Durban, South Africa this week — particularly on China, the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitter.

The international community is upping the pressure on China to take serious steps to reduce emissions. China’s biggest climate pressures, however, are coming from within.

As living standards go up, Chinese citizens are paying more attention to quality-of-life issues, particularly air quality. They are pressuring their government to reduce air pollution — much as U.S. citizens pushed for the Clean Air Act — and that pressure is giving the Chinese leadership new incentives to adopt tighter air pollution standards and to take on more ambitious emissions reduction programs.

Air quality has been a hot topic in China for years, but the U.S. Embassy in Beijing added to the debate by offering an alternative source of information about local air pollution and the potential impacts on citizen health. In 2008 the U.S. embassy installed a roof-top air quality monitoring system that samples the Beijing air every hour. The embassy provides a mobile app that anyone can register for to receive the hourly readings, which define the conditions as “fine,” “terrible” or “hazardous” depending on the amount of pollution particles in the air.

These reports have created a major controversy in China, because the U.S. embassy bases their assessments on EPA standards that measure particulate air pollution down to the smaller (2.5 microns in diameter and below) particles.  China’s standards, in contrast, only measure and report particles down to the 10 micron (micrometer) level. That is a critical oversight, because PM 2.5 particles are among the most dangerous. Due to their small size, they can penetrate deeper into the lungs and cause more severe health damage.

If Chinese officials include PM 2.5 particles in their environmental reports without also tightening up regulatory standards to control those particles, that would lower the country’s environmental assessment ratings and create new pressures that many Chinese officials are not yet ready to deal with. This is a particular concern for China’s local government officials, who need good reports to pass up to their superiors, and who sometimes struggle to accurately measure local pollution emissions.

Chinese leaders are working to shift their economy toward cleaner and more efficient energy sources, but those upgrades are costly, and Chinese citizens and enterprises have limited ability to absorb higher utility bills. The government is stepping in to subsidize many of these upgrades, but the improvements still take time. In the interim, Chinese officials prefer to tailor their monitoring standards to their ability to actually regulate and enforce them. As long as they think controlling PM 2.5 particles is too difficult and costly, they prefer to keep those measurements out of their official assessment reports.

Some Chinese officials, therefore, were not too happy with the U.S. embassy’s mobile air pollution service, and they reportedly asked the embassy to shut it down (to no avail). But local citizens — many of whom have long distrusted the government’s air quality readings — have been signing up in droves.

This fall, Beijing is suffering repeated bouts of extremely severe air pollution. For multiple days running, the U.S. embassy monitoring station has registered air in the “hazardous” category, which according to the U.S. EPA is an “emergency condition” that could impact the entire population, not just sensitive groups. China’s official government reports, in contrast, have called the same conditions “level-3 minor pollution” (where level-1 is the most severe).

That discrepancy — and the severity of the health warnings from the U.S. embassy — have triggered serious public concern in China and a new round of debates about government transparency and the reliability of the government’s monitoring data.

At first, Chinese environmental officials and state media pushed back, claiming that their PM 10 standards were more scientific. Chinese citizens, however, did not back down. The air quality issue became a hot topic in the Chinese media and on online discussion forums, and the government has begun to realize that they will lose credibility if they do not address citizen concerns.

China’s Environmental Protection Ministry has responded by issuing the country’s first PM 2.5 air pollution standard, and they are also talking about heightening the existing PM 10 standard and adopting new measurements for carbon monoxide and ozone. Local officials are also setting up a new PM 2.5 monitoring station near Beijing.

There are two key takeaways here. First, Chinese citizens are pushing hard for cleaner air, and although they do not elect their leaders, they have more political influence than many foreign observers realize. China’s domestic environmental advocates are a strong ally for the international climate community, and we should not overlook them. Anything we can do to improve their access to accurate pollution information (as the U.S. embassy did with their air monitoring program) or increase their involvement in international climate discussions would be a good thing.

Second, this domestic pressure is pushing the Chinese government toward stricter air pollution standards and greenhouse gas emissions reductions domestically, and that will likely increase China’s willingness to accept more serious commitments at the international level.

These changes will certainly take time, and in the interim, the international community should keep pressuring China to do more.

However, we should not forget that when it comes to Chinese emissions, it is not the international community who has the most to lose. It is the Chinese citizens themselves. And when it comes to reducing the country’s emissions, they are a critical driving force that we should not overlook.

Melanie Hart is the China Energy and Climate Policy Analyst at the Center for American Progress; Tong Zhao is an Intern on the energy team at the Center for American Progress.

Green Christmas Gift | Eco-Friendly Dog Bed by P.L.A.Y

We at GEN are undoubtedly animal lovers and for that reason are in the process of opening a cage-free boarding and training facility at our compound in Agua Dulce, CA. Seeing that we’re all about lowering our environmental impact wherever we can, we have been contacting many eco-friendly companies to try out their products for review. Enter P.L.A.Y — or Pet Lifestyle and You — a company dedicated to reducing environmental waste by recycling old bottles and turning them into pet beds. This awesome company offered to send us one of their swanky beds for large breed dogs. We tried it out and here is our honest opinion on their product:

Comfort-

This bed is SUPER plush especially considering it was made with recycled bottles. My husband decided to try it out himself and said that it is not only spacious enough for a person to lay on (in the fetal position, granted!) but its also provides ample cushion to keep him from sinking into our hardwood flooring. He also weighs about 200 pounds, by the way. It should be noted that my business partner purchased a few of Costco brand dog beds to cut costs, which are similar in size — and those beds don’t even come close to the padding that P.L.A.Y provides. Definitely a well made dog bed.

Durability-

About 4-5 dogs have already made their home on the P.L.A.Y bed, and every seam and stitch is completely in tact. In comparison again with Costco brand beds, P.L.A.Y is MUCH more durable – as the former already had snags at the seams before any dog even touched it. Since we’ve only been using the bed for about 2 weeks, it is too early to tell the true durability especially because we haven’t had too many dogs coming in and out of the facility yet. Photo below is comparing the cushion in the Costco brand bed (left) to the P.L.A.Y brand dog bed (right).

Design-

The style of this “Savannah” dog bed in the sepia/dark chocolate color scheme is absolutely stunning. The top of the bed features a glossy, almost elephant skin looking design, but colored to fit the African desert. They also have an ash grey/cool grey option that actually much more resembles elephant skin, but the brown tones were more appropriate for our indoor dog lounge area. This bed could definitely fit the more upscale home decor.

Eco-Friendly Factor-

The best part about P.L.A.Y beds, as we mentioned before, is the fact that they are made to help reduce the world’s environmental waste. An astounding 92 recycled bottles made their way into the polyfiber filling for this particular bed. Not only that, but all the tags on their products are made from F.S.C. certified paper. While it would have been nice to see the entire bed being made out of re-purposed materials, the filling is a good start.

All in all, we couldn’t find too many negative aspects about this bed. However, with a price tag of $189 USD, it seems to be more well suited for the sophisticated dog owner looking to lessen their environmental impact a bit while still considering style.

As required by the FTC: I received no monetary compensation for this review. I received a product sample for the purpose of my review. All opinions expressed are mine and mine alone.

Green Christmas Gift | Eco-Friendly Dog Bed by P.L.A.Y

We at GEN are undoubtedly animal lovers and for that reason are in the process of opening a cage-free boarding and training facility at our compound in Agua Dulce, CA. Seeing that we’re all about lowering our environmental impact wherever we can, we have been contacting many eco-friendly companies to try out their products for review. Enter P.L.A.Y — or Pet Lifestyle and You — a company dedicated to reducing environmental waste by recycling old bottles and turning them into pet beds. This awesome company offered to send us one of their swanky beds for large breed dogs. We tried it out and here is our honest opinion on their product:

Comfort-

This bed is SUPER plush especially considering it was made with recycled bottles. My husband decided to try it out himself and said that it is not only spacious enough for a person to lay on (in the fetal position, granted!) but its also provides ample cushion to keep him from sinking into our hardwood flooring. He also weighs about 200 pounds, by the way. It should be noted that my business partner purchased a few of Costco brand dog beds to cut costs, which are similar in size — and those beds don’t even come close to the padding that P.L.A.Y provides. Definitely a well made dog bed.

Durability-

About 4-5 dogs have already made their home on the P.L.A.Y bed, and every seam and stitch is completely in tact. In comparison again with Costco brand beds, P.L.A.Y is MUCH more durable – as the former already had snags at the seams before any dog even touched it. Since we’ve only been using the bed for about 2 weeks, it is too early to tell the true durability especially because we haven’t had too many dogs coming in and out of the facility yet. Photo below is comparing the cushion in the Costco brand bed (left) to the P.L.A.Y brand dog bed (right).

Design-

The style of this “Savannah” dog bed in the sepia/dark chocolate color scheme is absolutely stunning. The top of the bed features a glossy, almost elephant skin looking design, but colored to fit the African desert. They also have an ash grey/cool grey option that actually much more resembles elephant skin, but the brown tones were more appropriate for our indoor dog lounge area. This bed could definitely fit the more upscale home decor.

Eco-Friendly Factor-

The best part about P.L.A.Y beds, as we mentioned before, is the fact that they are made to help reduce the world’s environmental waste. An astounding 92 recycled bottles made their way into the polyfiber filling for this particular bed. Not only that, but all the tags on their products are made from F.S.C. certified paper. While it would have been nice to see the entire bed being made out of re-purposed materials, the filling is a good start.

All in all, we couldn’t find too many negative aspects about this bed. However, with a price tag of $189 USD, it seems to be more well suited for the sophisticated dog owner looking to lessen their environmental impact a bit while still considering style.

As required by the FTC: I received no monetary compensation for this review. I received a product sample for the purpose of my review. All opinions expressed are mine and mine alone.

Nissan Partners in Off-Grid Solar EV Charging Project

Solar Charging Project Brings Renewable Energy Future to Jordan-

AllCell Technologies, a leading manufacturer of lithium-ion battery packs, has teamed up with multiple cleantech companies to create a completely off-grid solar EV charging station. Located in Amman, Jordan, the station can charge both a Nissan LEAF and multiple light electric vehicles simultaneously, is off-grid and includes a lithium-ion energy storage system that is protected from the scorching heat of the desert sun using AllCell’s thermal management system. The country, despite its ideal location for energy derived from oil, is apparently lacking in fossil fuel resources and imports over 90 percent of its energy. What the country lacks, however, it makes up for with a solar radiation zone perfect for generating clean, renewable energy which has been largely untapped as of yet.

The charging station consists of a 3 kilowatt solar canopy developed by Sun Phocus, AllCell’s 25 kilowatt-hour lithium-ion energy storage system, and DBT’s Level II charging station. For the project, Nissan provided its all electric Nissan LEAF vehicle, Matra contributed two electric scooters and a pair of electric GEM cars – with each GEM car incorporating a solar roof. AllCell CEO Said Al-Hallaj, who has been overseeing the project since the fall of 2010, is very excited at what the future will hold for energy impoverished nations like Jordan. “The combination of solar energy, electric vehicles, and energy storage holds enormous promise as a solution to multiple problems inherent in today’s energy systems. The benefits include reduced oil consumption and carbon emissions, increased peak electricity generation, and grid-friendly load shifting. As the prices of solar panels, batteries, and electric vehicles continue to fall, such a system will be economically feasible in the near future.” The charging station will serve as a model for a large-scale infrastructure project to eventually help the government meet its goal of using at least 10 percent renewable energy by 2020.

5 Amazing Structures Made from Plastic Bottles

1. EcoARK

The innovative and very impressive EcoARK in Taiwan is a monument to recycling. The three-story tall building, complete with an amphitheater and exhibition hall, was constructed using 1.5 million plastic bottles. Embedded solar power helps to run the building’s magnificent LED light displays at night. The Far Eastern Group, which commissioned the building, wanted to highlight the importance of reusing and recycling in a country where, according to The China Post, the plastic bottle recycling rate is only four percent.

2.Plastiki

Last year, Plastiki, the boat made from 12,500 plastic bottles, crossed the Pacific Ocean – from San Francisco to Sydney – in about four months. The boat was made from mostly recycled materials, including the plastic bottles, reclaimed aluminum irrigation pipe and hand-made PET cloth, which was used for the sail.

3. Hug It Forward

Hug It Forward does many things, but one fundamental aspect of their community empowerment focus is the bottle school. The organization works with communities in Guatemala to collect littered plastic bottles and build schools out of the waste. Not only does this program help clean up the environment, it also helps communities join together and build something with long-term positive potential. Learn more about Hug It Forward and their bottle schools here.

4. Midwest Floating Island

Midwest Floating Island uses recycled plastic bottles in their water purification systems, which are basically little islands “designed to support vegetation above the waterline and beneficial microbial habitat below,” according to the website. So, not only do these islands reuse plastic bottles, they also provide habitat and clean the water. Recently, the floating islands were used to help clean Spring Lake in Minneapolis.

5. Sustainable Communities Initiatives

Sustainable Communities Initiatives in Scotland designs and helps build greenhouses made from plastic bottles. This project has been incorporated especially in schools, because the children learn not only how to built the structure, but also the importance of reducing and reusing. But anyone can do it; you just need hundreds of plastic bottles, a little know-how and a few hours of hard work.

Editor’s Note: Earth911 partners with many industries, manufacturers and organizations to support its Recycling Directory, the largest in the nation, which is provided to consumers at no cost. The International Bottled Water Association is one of these partners. Article originally posted on Earth911.com.