Our World and Everything in It

 

The polar bears made the list! I can’t believe the Bush administration finally listened to the courts. Dirk Kempthorne, Secy. of the Interior, begrudgingly gave in. He made it emphatic that this will in no way affect efforts to drill in the Arctic. He is one of Bush’s handpicked cronies that continuously pits the environment, animals, and their habitat against industry.

 

Kempthorne’s remark that he wasn’t stalling on adding the bears to the endangered list in lieu of the sales of big oil leases is a crock if you followed the story. Heck, he looked to put the bears on the list way back in 2006. http://www.doi.gov/news/06_News_Releases/061227.html. What ever took so long?

 

Even though the bears made the list, the problems are not over. Prepare for more slight of hand dealings by the Bush Administation.

.

 

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/may2008/2008-05-14-10.asp

 

 

The McConnell-Domenici amendment #4720 (American Energy Production Act) that would open up the Arctic to oil drilling failed to pass. Under a previous UC agreement, the amendment must receive 60 votes to be agreed to. The amendment was not agreed to by a vote of 42-56. Under the previous agreement, the amendment is withdrawn.

 

Remember Snidley Whiplash from the cartoons, the villain that would always say, “Curses, foiled again?” It’s how I picture the Republican obstructionists lead by Trent Lott. And a big ha, ha, ha, ha, ha from me and all the people who took the trouble to contact their senators to oppose 4720. Way to go.

Meanwhile, Senator Harry Reid’s amendment  #4737 (To increase the supply and lower the cost of petroleum by temporarily suspending the acquisition of petroleum for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve) passed almost unanimously.  Under a previous UC agreement, the amendment must receive 60 votes to be agreed to. The amendment was agreed to by a vote of 97-1.

I hope we can manage to keep out of the Arctic until this administration is gone. Whittling down the 29-39  Republicans in the senate poised to continue the fight for the ideals of the Bush/Cheney regime couldn’t hurt. The battle isn’t over. I’m sure. 

For current results of votes in the senate read: http://www.senate.gov/galleries/pdcl/index.htm

 

 

I received this e-mail from Defenders of Wildlife:

The Senate will vote on an amendment to the national Flood Insurance Bill offered by Senator Mitch McConnell (KY) and co-sponsored by Senator Pete Domenici (NM) that threatens polar bears and other wildlife.

Rather than addressing high oil prices and dependence on foreign oil by moving toward better alternatives and practical solutions, this amendment promotes more drilling in more places for more oil profits. 

This is not a solution, it’s a sell off. Please take action right now…

1. Make the call. Either today or tomorrow morning, please call your Senators at one of the numbers below:

 Carl Levin - (202) 224-6221 or (313) 226-6020 - http://levin.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

 Debbie Stabenow - (202) 224-4822 or (517) 203-1760 - http://stabenow.senate.gov/email.cfm

 If you are calling after 5:00 PM or before 8:00 AM Eastern time, please be sure to leave a message.

2. State your name and where you are from and tell your senators to “OPPOSE the McConnell-Domenici amendment (#4720) to the Flood Insurance Bill. This awful amendment would allow harmful drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, promote the use of unproven coal-to-liquid technologies, promote environmentally harmful shale development and end the decades-old moratorium on new drilling off the coasts of Florida, California, Virginia and other coastal states.”

3. Report your call. Your feedback will help our activists on Capitol Hill more effectively target their efforts to defeat this awful proposal.

The McConnell-Domenici amendment is the latest in a long string of ill-conceived, cynical and increasingly desperate attempts by the oil companies and their allies in Congress to industrialize our wild places under the guise of “energy security.”

Here are some facts about the amendment that the oil companies don’t want you to hear…

• It won’t lower summer gas prices in America.
  New drilling offshore and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge wouldn’t hit the market for many years. Even then, its effect on prices at the pump will be small. In fact, U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) data indicates that in 2030, when oil discovered in the Arctic Refuge would be near peak production levels, the effect at the gas pump would be only about two pennies per gallon. 
• The MConnell-Domenici amendment will threaten polar bears.
  The noise and disturbance caused by drilling in the Arctic Refuge — the most important onshore denning habitat for America’s struggling polar bears — could cause polar bear mothers to abandon their cubs to die. Such drilling would also further extend America’s dependence on climate-changing fuel sources that are threatening the very survival of these and other animals.
• The MConnell-Domenici amendment will threaten birds, sea lions and other wildlife.
  Last year’s disastrous oil spill off the coast of San Francisco, which killed birds and raised concerns about the long-term impacts on the area’s sea lions and harbor seals, demonstrates the dangers of increased oil production and shipping off our coasts.      
• The amendment will undercut efforts to fight global warming.
  The McConnell-Dominici amendment would not only extend America’s addiction to oil, it would also encourage the use of coal-to-liquid technology technology — which emits high quantities of greenhouse gasses – and promote environmentally destructive oil shale development.

I made the calls locally to Senators Stabenow and Levin just a half an hour ago.  Just tell them you want this bill opposed. My calls were answered by a person who recorded them, and I’ve reported my calls to Defenders so they have a head count to oppose this on Capitol Hill. It’s extremely important to call, especially since I just posted that scientists have evidence upon evidence that man has affected the environment for thousands of years. We’re the culprit and to just continue to pollute is absolute suicide first for the animals and eventually for us. If you care about generations to come stop big oil once and for all.

This was  fairly easy information to find as far as the big 3 American oil companies. I did the math for percentages. BP is on the list because they bought Amoco. Shell is on it because Royal Dutch Shell has an American operation, and holds leases in Alaska under heavy protest against drilling in delicate habitat.

Here’s how it looks below. The results are what I expected, a pretty dismal picture. But I ended up reading many of the oil company websites, and what their opponents wrote as well. It comes down to the fact that they are, after all, oil companies and intend to stay that way.  They are pretty much throwing some money at alternatives to look good while others really seem in earnest and are investing for the environment. It’s Conoco-Phillips. I’m going to do a blog on them and a really big move they are making with Tyson Foods.  I am impressed. All of these oil companies are at the upper echelon of earnings worldwide! They can afford to invest.

Exxon Mobil, one of the biggest oil companies in the world had net profit earnings in 2007 of $40.6 billion. http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/04/news/international/bc.apfn.eu.fin.com.britain.bp.ap/

“Exxon Mobil, meanwhile, dismisses renewable energy and puts its record profits into shareholder dividends” http://energypriorities.com/entries/2005/12/bp_alternative_energy_unit.php

Chevron had a net profit in 2007 of $18.7 billion. http://www.chevron.com/news/press/release/?id=2008-02-01
Chevron invested $300 million per year for alternative energy sources, which is .016% or 16 thousandths of their profit.

Conoco-Phillips had a net profit in 2007 of $11.9 billion. It fell from $15.5 billion last year. http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=111&sid=1331478. Conoco-Phillips said that investments in alternative energy would be around $150 million. That’s .012% or 12 thousandths of their profit. http://money.cnn.com/2007/04/10/news/companies/pluggedin_gunther_conocophillips.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2007041109

BP had net profit income in 2007 of $20.8 billion.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/04/news/international/bc.apfn.eu.fin.com.britain.bp.ap/  BP “may invest up to $8 billion over 10 years that’s 800 million per year, and very generous for an oil company. But the article went on to say:  Meanwhile, their budget for conventional oil and gas projects is almost $15 billion per year.” http://energypriorities.com/entries/2005/12/bp_alternative_energy_unit.php. Eight hundred million dollars per year is a lot, but it’s only .038% or thirty eight thousandths of their profit income. http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9021952&contentId=7040761

Dutch Royal Shell had net profits in 2007 of $27.5 billion.             
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=511387&in_page_id=1770. John Hofmeister, president of Shell answered when asked how much Shell was investing in alternatives fuels: “I’d say about $1 billion over the last five years. We’ll continue to spend at that level.    That’s $200 million per year and only .007% or 7 thousandths of their net profits. http://www.shell.com/home/Framework?siteId=us-en&FC3=/us-en/html/iwgen/energy_security/faq/faq.html#4.

A quick summary gives us a total of over $119 billion dollars ($119,500,000,000.00) in net profits among all oil companies listed. Their investment for alternative energy is almost $1½ billion dollars ($1,450,000,000.00) annually. That’s .012% or 12 thousandths of their combined income-not a heck of a lot, but hey, we’ll take it. And the next time somebody tries to tell you how much the oil industry is investing in alternative energy, you won’t be naive.
 
Here is a pretty good website that gives a snapshot of the top oil companies also:
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/07/money_guzzlers.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/dec/11/oil.bp

I don’t know if any other people interested in moving forward with all types of alternative energy have noticed the purposeful placement of the word “foreign” in many of the presidential contenders, Bush/Cheney, and legislator’s speeches. When a politician says they will make sure to fund research for new technologies to get us away from “foreign” oil dependence, they are probably talking money for a new type of oil drilling process. Technically, they won’t be lying, just misleading, if you tend to disregard that tricky little word “foreign.”

Granted, it’s been said that we do not have alternative technology available yet to take up the brunt of our oil demand, but it seems we keep looking to only one, and not a combination of alternative sources. What about a combination of alternative energy sources? I hear this idea floating around, but no gelling. The Sierra Club of Michigan has a very good presentation that shows a combination of energy sources, wind, solar, geothermal, etc., plus conservation programs like reclaiming wastewater, and recycling may meet all of our energy demands in Michigan. But we’re not advancing toward a future that will no longer be reliant on one big massive conglomerate like the oil cartel is to us right now. It seems we work toward monopolies in this country. Then we’re upset when we’re stuck with them without a choice. We should be looking to all venues to move forward for our energy future, not reinforcing the idea of fossil fuel again, like it’s all right because it belongs to us. 

I see the big push to get away from “foreign” oil as the big ruse to drill in the Arctic circle, the polar bear habitat, Utah, even Livonia, MI for Pete’s sake, and anywhere a slant oil drill can legitimately be utilized to “not’ enter our protected National Parks. They do so anyway at an angle right under protected habitat, while doing a great deal of damage with all the accompanying paraphernalia like roads, pipeline, trucks, heavy equipment, and trash. Ditto for coal mining. Using coal is getting away from “foreign” oil, all oil, but is still perpetuating the use of filthy fossil fuel that will eventually run out. Sure it might be thousands of years before it does, but at what price, gutting the countryside, ruining the earth trying?

So beware of that tricky little “foreign” word that comes before oil. It’s not a detail that should go unnoticed, because it doesn’t make any difference. It does, or they wouldn’t be slipping it in there.  It makes all the difference in our lives, our environment, and our world whether our future continues to poke around the earth and the oceans below for oil or coal that is “OURS.” Our oil and coal burn just as filthy as the “foreign” stuff.

Wonder what’s been going on behind the scenes on Capital Hill while the campaign takes over the news? I have. I don’t trust them. While the campaign smoke screen is up a lot has been transpiring, or rather conspiring against wildlife and the environment in an effort to get us away from foreign oil.  How will the Saudis like that? Is that why we’re supplying guns and ammo to them,  because we’re weaning them off?  Anyway, here is a sample of the urgent e-mails I’ve been getting from many environmental groups because our dubious administration is at work again.

I belong to Care2.com, a wonderful website of over 8 million members who care passionately about something, kids, people’s rights, animal welfare, the environment, etc. I got an e-mail to petition none other than Dirk Kempthorne, Secy. of the Interior, again. The same guy that is angling to kill off the entire wolf species in Idaho, and possibly Wyoming by aerial hunting, snares, etc. It seems we haven’t done enough to polar bears, now Kempthorne’s positioned to allow drilling for oil in the middle of their habitat too. Here is what the petition states: “At a time when the polar bear’s future is literally on thin ice, it’s no time to add insult to injury by drilling in their fragile Arctic habitat. But it could happen. Alaska’s Chukchi and Beaufort Seas - also known as the Polar Bear Seas - could be opened to drilling as early as February.” Better start pressuring Kempthorne, or join Care2.com and sign the petition, and many others on their website for a better world. This is almost a done deal. It doesn’t look like Kempthorne’s going to add the polar bear to the endangered list.

The Wilderness Society posted an e-mail that states: “A draft environmental impact statement to be released next week by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will pave the way for 110,000 acres of wildlife habitat within the Yukon Flats National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to be traded to the native-owned Doyon Corporation for oil and gas development. Under the proposed deal, Doyon also would obtain 97,000 acres in subsurface rights within the Refuge. Doyon would turn over approximately 150,000 acres of corporation land to the Refuge in the proposed exchange.” Sounds OK? Not so much. As the USFWS well knows, “Oil and gas development are not compatible with the purposes of the refuge—something that USFWS itself has acknowledged in the past. Development poses a threat to water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, subsistence cultures, and the wilderness and recreational values of the refuge and its adjacent public lands.”

A Clean Water Action e-mail stated: “Polluter attacks on the Clean Water Act continue. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is accepting public comments until January 21 on a policy that will determine which rivers, lakes, streams and wetlands are fully protected.” This maneuvering by “[t]he Bush Administration has sought to limit Clean Water Act protections through direct attacks on the law, by misinterpreting Supreme Court decisions and through a series of “No Protection” instructions to the federal and state bureaucrats.” But the e-mail asserts, “Congress is considering legislation to clarify that the Clean Water Act is meant to protect all water bodies. But the e-mail asserts, “Congress is considering legislation to clarify that the Clean Water Act is meant to protect all water bodies. In the meantime, we have to stop these backdoor attacks on the laws that protect our water quality.” This is a good link to take you right to the EPA site.

The only good e-mail I received is that the Greenpeace boat, the Esperanza, caught up with the Japanese whalers and is chasing them around the Southern Ocean. You might want to donate to any or all of these charitable organizations. We have no idea the sacrifice these people make to protect things we cherish like our national parks and rivers, lakes, wildlife, and environment. People like you and me are up all hours, in bad parts of the world, arguing/fighting with foreign countries sometimes, in adverse conditions for what they believe in. Imagine boarding a ship, leaving loved ones, to chase and confront another ship in frigid seas and rotten conditions out of passion for the cause. And we take them for granted. These organizations of everyday citizens are the “THEY” we all have spoken about when we say: “Oh well, THEY will do something about it,” or “I’m not worried, THEY will come up with something.” But THEY not only need monetary support, if THEY ask for people to write to congress or the Queen, please do it. It costs nothing but the time you’re spending goofing around on your pc anyway. And every voice behind these people shows those in charge that it is a force of many, many more people than THEY that are out there actually doing the job. God Bless THEM.
 
To write to Kempthorne about drilling in polar bear habitat: http://www.doi.gov/contact.html. Read more about Kempthorne ignoring senators, fishing industry, petitions, etc., http://www.wilderness.org/NewsRoom/Release/20080102.cfm

To join Care2.com and sign many petitions about many causes and meet a network of 8 million worldwide who care: http://www.care2.com/.

For more about the Alaskan Land Swap: http://www.wilderness.org/Library/Magazine/Summer2007/yukonflats.cfm.

For more about the Clean Water Act: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2155/t/203/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=22196.

I just got through reading some current worldwide environmental news and have to say, we don’t seem to have a clear-cut view of anything. What we profess, what we say, and what we actually do is all contrary.  First, I saw the Pope give his blessing and speak on behalf of peace and the environment over the Christmas season to over one billion Catholics. And the World Council of Churches that represents 560 million Christians worldwide is calling concerns over global warming a matter of faith. The WCC has had a program about climate change since 1992 and books about ecotheology (I’m interested).  Dr. Samuel Kobia the Secy. General of the WCC stipulates that Christians are well aware that dominion over all living things was given to us. He said that meant, “We were entrusted with the care of the rest of God’s creation.” The emphasis is on the word “CARE” here.

Care doesn’t come under savagely taking a machete to an orangutan trying to defend it’s young, or hooking a live dolphin in the side and sending it to be stripped of skin before it’s even dead, while the resulting meat is basically poison from ingesting too many pollutants, or shooting 6 elephants dead for stepping into a coffee field that is supposed to be their sanctuary. We should actively try to get this stopped, but our demands for things like lumber and coffee encourage it.  Oh and don’t forget about native animals and the latest Internet hunting websites that have yet to be banned in over 20 states.

There was the news about a zoo tiger that got loose and killed one man, and maimed two others before it was shot dead. The media wanted to know and put this question out to the public if it is wise to keep caged and wild animals? 145,000,000 people visit zoos every year without incident. If we didn’t have zoos the likelihood of seeing a live polar bear, tiger, elephant, orangutan, gorilla, condor, panda…etc., would more than likely be nil. I have to wonder about the media here. Do they operate with any type of perspective about things, or just pounce on a bit of fantastic news with so much fervor it gets skewed out of proportion and normalcy? People are maimed in cars every day and no one says: “Gee, should we really be driving?”

 

We’ve heard about individual states taking their own course of action for the environment with many implementing their own environmental laws especially since the Supreme Court decided that the EPA is supposed to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases according to the Clean Air Act but has not done so. So what do I read? The Bush administration: “Thursday announced that it will block efforts by California, Maryland, and 15 other states to cut emissions of global warming gases from cars and trucks.” Now that is an example of talking out of two sides of one’s mouth isn’t it? Aren’t we supposed to be forging ahead with alternative energy anyway?

 

This administration got elected based on a big moral majority. Do we or do we not celebrate animals? I hope we  understand the world is in our care. We simply can’t keep spreading and demanding, taking up room where other things live. We end up killing the very same animals we ooh and ah over at the zoo. We love cartoon movies with animals, little talking pigs, Flipper, the Lion King. We are supposed to teach our children to be kinds to animals. But when animals act out in their normal manner we talk about dispensing with them right away, like the zoo issue. We sacrifice living breathing creatures in our own species chain over things we need for our big houses or our big lifestyle. And we elect our president/vice president based on morality when this latest threat to block states trying to do right by the environment proves the opposite. So where do we stand between what we believe, what we say, and what we actually do about our world and everything in it because I can’t tell?

 

By the way, a current gallop poll has President Bush as the number one pick among the most admired men and women of 2007. Is that not the icing on the cookie for contradictions as far as you’ve read them here?
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/dec2007/2007-12-24-01.asp.

      

  

 On Christmas Eve I think it’s important to remember where the Christ Child was born, AMONG THE ANIMALS in a manger. Every nativity scene is one with animals. A manger in those days was: “a feed trough found in a stable. In Bible times mangers were made from clay mixed with straw or from stones held together with mud; sometimes they were carved in natural outcroppings of rock,” http://www.padfield.com/1999/manger.html. There is an actual picture taken of a manger at Megiddo used in the stables of King Ahab on the linked website.

So the King of Kings was placed in the feed trough of the animals of a stable. This is a quite a statement about the beasts of the earth, that they were worthy of such an event. This Christmas take the time to reflect not only on mankind, but peace for the earth and all of the living things that are in jeopardy of extinction. The “beasts” as in animals of the earth are written about in the old and new testament over 200 times. Their importance is undeniable. We weren’t meant to live in a world without animals, especially those that have been here for centuries that are now in danger.

PEACE

A few blogs ago I wrote about setting an example as far as being humane to animals before we point fingers at other countries that dolphin hunt, seal hunt, whale hunt, and kill tigers, elephants, and apes.  Someone retorted about other countries, which was exactly what I made a point about NOT doing. After all, isn’t that one of the first things we teach siblings, not to point fingers elsewhere?

Anyway after the same commenter digressed to this being the best country in the world, the idea of being a good example was kind of lost in conversation. But it is important, and I am resurrecting the notion. Being good examples for all types of humanitarian efforts would give us much better leverage for persuading other governments to give up inhumane hunts like the renewed Japanese whale hunt.

An example of what I am talking about jumped off the “Verbatim” page of Time Magazine’s December 3rd issue. This Japanese whale-meat butcher in the whaling port of Shimonoseki, the home of Japan’s largest whaling expedition in decades, remarked about the inhumanity of it all: ‘”How is eating whale different from eating pigs or cows?”‘ See my point?

We’ll never get anywhere asking other countries not to seal, whale, or dolphin hunt when we slaughter and treat animals inhumanely ourselves. It looks like pollution may halt hunts like these before conscience even comes into play. The Japanese plan on hunting 50 endangered pin whales and 50 threatened humpback whales, along with others, totaling 1000. Trouble is, just like the dolphin meat from the barbaric Japanese dolphin hunt, the whale meat is more than likely poison, tainted by chemical toxins. Many of the larger species of fish and mammals in the ocean are contaminated. A current study by: “Norwegian scientists found that killer whales - or orcas, as they are sometimes known - have overtaken polar bears at the head of the toxic table” according to a BBC article. It said: “No other arctic mammals have ingested such a high concentration of hazardous man-made chemicals.” I was a little amazed at what was found in the blubber, traces of pesticide, flame retardant, and PCB’s. The WWF or World Wildlife Foundation says, “The Arctic has become a chemical sink.”

But are the Japanese worried? Why should they be? An opinion poll done last year by the Nippon Research Centre found that 95% percent of Japanese never or rarely ate whale meat. So why the hunt? Like I stated in another blog, this hunt is being done under the guise of research. The odd thing is another study found that, “65% of Japanese students agreed with the view that scientific research on whales should only use non-lethal methods.”

All the bad international press about this whale hunt embarrasses Japan’s leadership. Japanese don’t eat the meat. A majority of Japanese college students do not advocate the killing of a species in order to study it. And the meat is more than likely poisoned. But the hunt goes on? Sounds like other countries have the same problem as we do where a majority of voices go unheard, and unheeded.
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4520104.stm
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/fearing-us-reaction-japanese

 

That story made the news last week but the event happened in August. Four bottlenose (Flipper) dolphins encircled an injured surfer after a shark attack, bringing him to shore. It’s not the first time dolphins have saved a human. An article stated that dolphins protecting humans goes back to ancient Greece. I told you that to ask you this.

 

Why are we allowing dolphin hunts by a small Japanese village? Dolphins have been friends with humans for centuries and we knowingly allow their slaughter? And this is not about relations with Japan. There are Japanese that want the slaughter banned also. One of the key reasons, and the Japanese government knows this, is that the dolphin meat is contaminated with high levels of mercury.

The Japanese retested the dolphin meat themselves and were surprised.

 

The other reason this event should not be such a big problem to stop is because it is an isolated event. It happens in a cove outside of a small fishing village in Japan called “Taiji.”  Notoriety is building about these fisherman chasing dolphins into a cove where they are trapped by nets in the thousands. Some 20,000 human friendly dolphins are caught and slaughtered. I didn’t want to read about it. There is a video of it on “You Tube.” I guess the poor little guys aren’t always dead when…

 

So this event happens in one small fishing village, not as a custom throughout Japan, and there are Japanese that want it stopped also. The meat is poison, and the Japanese government knows about it. It only a matter of time you might say, meanwhile, Flipper is being stripped alive.

 

This should not be a big problem to fix. This should be about a few talks with Japanese officials urging them to prohibit killing dolphins by a few of their citizens. The argument is there is no market for poison fish anyway. The fisherman should not only be in trouble for killing dolphins this way, but selling mercury tainted meat. Besides, knowing what we know about dolphins, this is as cannibalistic as eating bushmeat. Let me go one step further in adding that the levels of mercury in our friends the dolphins is about as rotten a deal as killing them outright. So we that pollute are no better. And for those that don’t think man pollutes enough to cause change on earth, how did those dolphins get saturated with mercury?

 

Our congress people will not move on this unless we make it known that we want it stopped. The world needs to realize better policy concerning the creatures of earth that are threatened by our pollution. Write your congress people about getting Japan on board to prohibit Taiji from killing dolphins.

 

Read about what I read about at: http://www.savejapandolphins.org/weblog.html

The dolphin rescue story: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21689083/