Unique opportunity in Minnesota

A chance to stop the dirtiest oil

Minnesotans should work to halt a pipeline that would expand the market for tar sands extraction.

By NELLIS KENNEDY and WINONA LADUKE

Say it was a moment in history, and you could do something to stop the ecologically most destructive project on the face of the earth. Would you raise your voice or just wave it on?

Minnesota has that opportunity, and many Ojibwe tribal members are raising their voices to do the right thing.

That project -- the Canadian Tar Sands -- is devastating land, water and people in the north who rely on the land for their food. Land and water are poisoned. Rare cancers are becoming commonplace in small Dene, Cree and Metis communities, and the earth is being scraped down hundreds of feet to create oil for an American market. It is the most inefficient energy equation imaginable, and the most destructive.

An area the size of Lake Superior is slated for strip mining for tar sands. Canada and the province of Alberta and Canada have leased more than 65,000 square kilometers of land for tar sands development. Environmental regulations in Alberta are lax. Tar sands production is licensed to use more water than Alberta's two major cities -- Calgary and Edmonton -- combined. That water is turned into poison, laced with chemical sludge. Daily, tar sands producers burn 600 million cubic feet of natural gas to produce tar sands oil, enough natural gas to heat 3 million homes. The carbon emissions for the project surpass those of 97 nations in the world combined.

This month, hundreds said "no." Leech Lake Tribal citizens bravely gathered in protest to speak to the tribal council about a decision that will affect their lands. Unfortunately, the tribal council signed an agreement to allow a pipeline to cross tribal lands and transport oil to Superior, Wis., but elders in the community continue to fight its construction.

The pipeline, if completed, will carry the world's dirtiest oil from Alberta. Oil companies use up to five barrels of water to produce one barrel of oil, but the process also creates two barrels of toxic waste. Not to mention that the project is producing greenhouse gases while also destroying the boreal forest, part of the world's most important storehouse of climate regulating carbon and oxygen.

The tar sands project is deforesting the countryside and releasing an average of 11 million liters of contaminated water into the environment every day. A pipeline across northern Minnesota will not only allow for the expansion of the tar sands project into American markets, it will threaten our own forests and groundwater by exposing them to potential spills and deforestation.

Tar sands oil is so evil that all 43 First Nations Chiefs in Alberta have sought to place a moratorium on the project. Opponents aptly call the project "Mordor," a tribute to Tolkien's land of death.

Now they want to move Mordor south.

Transporting oil is not safe for Minnesota or the Leech Lake people.

Last week's signing was not without protest, but the council felt the economic burdens of tribal debt were too great to decline such an offer. Hundreds of Leech Lake citizens continued to protest the contract by seeking a referendum but were unable to successfully bring the vote back to the people. Today, these same citizens are looking for alternative measures that might be taken to help stop the construction of a pipeline.

Minnesotans have a unique opportunity to stop the transport to market of the most destructive oil project in the world. A project that would not pass a federal environmental impact statement in Minnesota should not be allowed to sell to our markets -- or we have simply exported our environmental destruction. Minnesota's leaders, tribal leaders, private landowners and the Obama administration must stop the project and its pipelines to market. We have a chance to raise our voices and say no.

Nellis Kennedy, a member of the Navajo Nation, is a national campaign associate with Honor the Earth. Winona LaDuke is Honor the Earth's executive director, a White Earth enrollee, an author and twice a vice presidential candidate with Ralph Nader on the Green Party ticket.

Source

Oil production set to fall long-term

By

Shashank Shekhar on Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Global oil production decline rate is set to accelerate in the coming years, according to a new research report.

"The global decline rate has averaged at least 4.5 per cent year-on-year in recent years. These rates, however, could accelerate further over the next few years," Merrill Lynch said in its recent update.

The New York-based financial advisory company produced several reasons in support of its argument.

It blamed the emphasis on developing small oil fields in past years and lack of regular investments for the expected decline.

Merrill said the non-Opec oil production may have already peaked, implying, non-Opec producers that meet 60 per cent of the world's oil demand will have a stagnated production. It apprehended that a resulting deceleration in production may aggravate further due to the credit crunch.

"In our base scenario, we see output decline rates of five per cent, and see non-Opec oil production stuck in the current 49 million to 50 million barrel per day (mbpd) range in the same period. Should the credit crunch push decline rates to six per cent, however, non-Opec production could fall precipitously towards 47mbpd by 2015 from the current levels."

A combination of low prices and the global credit crunch will prove "rather damaging" to the oil industry, Merrill emphasised. "Our most recent analysis suggests that decline rates could be running at a slightly higher rate."

Merrill said one of the key factors aggravating the decline rates around the world is the smaller size of new fields that have come into operations.

"Interestingly the decline rates are inversely proportional to the size of the field, with super giants experiencing a 3.4 per cent yearly decline, giant fields posing 6.5 per cent and large fields averaging 10.4 per cent."

The financial services firm said that with even production in Russia declining at a rate of five per cent every year, a capacity equivalent to Saudi Arabia's production needs to be replaced every two years. Warning that regular investments are not coming into the oil sector Merrill said that non-Opec members such as Canada had to delay projects such as oil sands.

The financial advisory firm also said deepwater oil projects could be effected during the financial crisis.

Robin Mills, a Dubai-based oil economist who recently authoured a book The myth of the oil crisis, termed the idea of "peak oil", a controversial one. "Most serious oil analysts see a global peak as still being some way away, perhaps several decades," Mills said.

"Even after the peak, when it comes after decades, supply may not fall quickly – it may remain on plateau for a long period," he said.

Citing several upcoming projects in countries like Kazakhstan, Brazil and India, Mills said non-Opec's production is likely to remain stable for the next few years but would pick up later.

"The peak oil predictions have been repeatedly proven false. Repeated upward revisions have had to be made in estimated ultimate recovery (EUR), a view on total global endowment of petroleum, produced to date and to be produced in future," Mills wrote in his book.

source:http://www.business24-7.ae/articles/2009/2/pages/02112009_2605ba6d866a4f20ae95fcbf54cb6ca5.aspx

Cynthia McKinney on Energy Policy

Dear Kevin Chavis:

This is in response to your letter a subject line:
Give us an energy policy for the future, not the past!.

I appreciate your message as I value your views on issues facing all Americans. As a Green Party Candidate for President, I also request your sincere consideration as you make your way to the polls Tuesday, November 4, 2008.

After receiving the Presidential nomination from my Party in July, and having named Rosa Clemente, a phenomenal Black Puerto Rican, Hip-Hop Historian / Activist, and esteemed Journalist as my running mate, we have campaigned across this nation for the support of the American people. We will appear on the ballot in 32 states and as Write-in Candidates in 16 other states.

According to Richard Winger of Ballot Access News, 70.5% of the voters will see our name on ballots. We stand a real chance of securing 5% of the votes in this election, thus making the Green Party US a 'third' political party in the nation. A 3rd seat at the table of public policy making can only enhance the chance of real issues facing the majority of Americans being brought to the forefront of those important conversations held on Capitol Hill.

Rosa and I believe that we offer American voters an option which reflects our nation's very best values. We believe that when American voters have the opportunity, they will go to the polls Tuesday and vote THEIR values rather than being forced to vote for the 'lesser of two evils.'

My opponents ask for your vote promising only to continue the Bush Administration's policy of spending a billion dollars a day on illegal and immoral wars of occupation abroad. They threaten to expand those wars into Iran and Pakistan. In their eloquent speeches, written by highly-paid speech writing professionals, your emotions are targeted creating visions of acts of evil from people who 'hate' us. That's not even fair because I know that you know better than that.

The Iraq war is a clear example of an unnecessary war based on inaccurate intelligence. And we have seen upwards of 4000 body bags and countless wounded Americans being brought home. Nobody even talks about the untold numbers of dead and injured foreign human beings; causalities of this unnecessary war.

Besides the illegal nature of our nation's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there are other important issues ignored by my opponents; my campaign has addressed those issues, some of which includes my commitment to universal access to healthcare -- a kind of Medicare-for-all plan; for the restoration of Constitutional Government and for urgent action on global warming. For full details, please visit us online at http://www.runcynthiarun.org and http://www.GP.org/.

Decent Americans deserve a Government as good as its People. As good as you! I invite you to come home to the Green Party today. Come home to the Party of Peace.

Vote Tuesday for Cynthia McKinney for President. Thank you for your vote and support.

Sincerely,
Cynthia McKinney

Paid for by the
Power to the People Committee
Cynthia McKinney for President

Republican running against Karen Clark in 61A

Kevin,

Thank you for contacting me. I believe that we as a society must break
free from our addiction to oil as soon as possible. But as you
inferred, I do not have much faith in government to accomplish this
objective. For example (in my opinion), the promotion of ethanol in
Minnesota through subsidies and mandates seems to be more of a favor to
the corn lobby than a viable energy solution. I am convinced that in
the long term, sustainable energy is inherently profitable. For this
reason I think the market will ultimately come up with a solution, but
only if it is left free from government intervention. The entrepreneur
who solves the energy problem will probably become the next billionaire.

Certainly, there are things that government can do to encourage this
process. We must end policies and subsidies that favor "Big Oil" in the
name of lower gas prices, and stop trying to preserve the existing
automobile industry. We must be more creative in designing cities and
communities that don't require everyone to have an automobile to get
around. We must end the moratorium on nuclear power in Minnesota. We
can also work to increase public awareness of the growing energy
problem, and to promote development of alternative energy sources, as
long as no specific strategy is mandated due to lobbyist pressure. And
as gas prices skyrocket while oil supplies run out, we must avoid the
temptation to put political (or other) pressure on other oil-producing
countries to favor the U.S. If we do these things, I believe that the
move to alternative energy sources will be a natural result of the laws
of supply and demand.

I hope this answers your question. I have added positions on a few
other issues to my website.

Thanks again -

- S. Andrew Sheppard

[ Note from Kevin: Andrew lives carfree, as I do. But he does not believe we should end our fossil fuel addiction at all. If we are to have a green and sustainable future, we will need government intervention to make that happen, and can do so without destroying the economy. A carbon tax could be enacted, allowing lower income and corporate taxes by the same amount would make the tax increase neutral. A carbon tax would end our addiction, saving Minnesotans from future oil shocks, and steer the economy to a greener path. Sheppard does not have my support in November. ]

Farheen Hakeem's Political Courage

Voters in south Minneapolis district have the right to know where their candidates stand on the issues. Only Farheen Hakeem has the audacity to stand up for what she believes in and how she will fight for her constituents. This is taken from her Political Courage Test at VoteSmart.org:

Abortion Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding abortion.
	a) Abortions should always be illegal.
X	b) Abortions should always be legal.
	c) Abortions should be legal only within the first trimester of pregnancy.
	d) Abortions should be legal when the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape.
	e) Abortions should be legal when the life of the woman is endangered.
	f) Abortions should be subject to a mandatory waiting period.
	g) Require clinics to give parental notification before performing abortions on minors.
	h) Other or expanded principles

Budget and Tax Issues

State Budget: Indicate what state funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one level per category, you can use a number more than once.
Slightly Increase	a) Education (Higher)
Greatly Increase	b) Education (K-12)
Maintain Status	c) Emergency preparedness
Greatly Increase	d) Environment
Maintain Status	e) Health care
Slightly Decrease	f) Law enforcement
Maintain Status	g) Transportation and highway infrastructure
Greatly Increase	h) Welfare
Greatly Increase	i) Other or expanded categories
For Health care, I would like to join with other legislators to bring Single Payer Universal Health care to Minnesota.
State Taxes: Indicate what state tax levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one level per category, you can use a number more than once.
Greatly Increase	a) Alcohol taxes
Slightly Increase	b) Cigarette taxes
Greatly Increase	c) Corporate taxes
Slightly Increase	d) Gasoline taxes
Maintain Status	e) Income taxes (incomes below $75,000)
Slightly Increase	f) Income taxes (incomes above $75,000)
Greatly Decrease	g) Property taxes
Maintain Status	h) Sales taxes
Slightly Increase	i) Vehicle taxes
	j) Other or expanded categories
Undecided	1) Should state sales taxes be extended to Internet sales?
Yes	2) Should accounts such as a "rainy day" fund be used to balance the state budget?
No	3) Should fee increases be used to balance the state budget?
	4) Other or expanded principles

Campaign Finance and Government Reform Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding campaign finance and government reform.
Yes	a) Do you support limiting the number of terms for Minnesota governors?
Yes	b) Do you support limiting the number of terms for Minnesota state senators and representatives?
c) Do you support limiting the following types of contributions to state legislative candidates?
Yes	1) Individual
Yes	2) PAC
Yes	3) Corporate
Yes	4) Political Parties
Yes	d) Do you support requiring full and timely disclosure of campaign finance information?
Yes	e) Do you support imposing spending limits on state-level political campaigns?
No	f) Should Minnesota participate in the federal REAL ID program?
Yes	g) Should Minnesota allow homeowners whose mortgage is in foreclosure a one-year deferment on their primary residence?
h) Other or expanded principles
No Answer

Crime Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding crime.
	a) Increase state funds for construction of state prisons and hiring of additional prison staff.
	b) Establish the death penalty in Minnesota.
X	c) Support programs to provide prison inmates with vocational and job-related skills and job-placement assistance when released.
X	d) Implement penalties other than incarceration for certain non-violent offenders.
X	e) Decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana.
	f) Minors accused of a violent crime should be prosecuted as adults.
	g) Support state and local law enforcement officials enforcing federal immigration laws.
X	h) Support hate crime legislation.
	i) Other or expanded principles

Education Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding education.
X	a) Support state funding of universal pre-K programs.
	b) Support federal education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students (No Child Left Behind).
X	c) Support state education standards and testing requirements for K-12 students.
	d) Support requiring public schools to administer high school exit exams.
	e) Allow parents to use vouchers to send their children to any public school.
	f) Allow parents to use vouchers to send their children to any private or religious school.
X	g) Provide state funding to increase teacher salaries.
	h) Support using a merit pay system for teachers.
X	i) Provide state funding for tax incentives and financial aid to help make college more affordable.
	j) Support allowing illegal immigrant high school graduates of Minnesota to pay in-state tuition at public universities.
	k) Other or expanded principles
I support J, but I would term it to be "Support allowing undocumented high school graduates of Minnesota to pay in-state tuition at public universities.

Employment Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding employment.
X	a) Increase funding for state job-training programs that re-train displaced workers and teach skills needed in today's job market.
	b) Reduce state government regulations on the private sector.
	c) Provide low interest loans and tax credits for starting, expanding, or relocating businesses.
	d) Provide tax credits for businesses that provide child care for children in low-income working families.
X	e) Increase state funds to provide child care for children in low-income working families.
X	f) Increase the state minimum wage.
X	g) Support laws that prevent employers from dismissing employees at will.
	h) Support financial punishments for those who knowingly employ illegal immigrants.
	i) Support increased work requirements for able-bodied welfare recipients.
	j) Increase funding for employment and job training programs for welfare recipients.
	k) Other or expanded principles

Environment and Energy Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding the environment and energy.
X	a) Promote increased use of alternative fuel technology.
	b) Support increased production of traditional domestic energy sources (e.g. coal, natural gas, oil, etc).
	c) Support providing financial incentives to farms that produce biofuel crops.
X	d) Use state funds to clean up former industrial and commercial sites that are contaminated, unused, or abandoned.
	e) Support funding for improvements to Minnesota's power generating and transmission facilities.
X	f) Support funding for open space preservation.
X	g) Limit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases linked to global warming.
X	h) Enact environmental regulations even if they are stricter than federal law.
	i) Other or expanded principles
I would support increased production of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar. I would also support funding for improvements to Minnesota's power generating and transmission facilities if it was to reduce our carbon footprint on the planet.

Gun Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding guns.
Yes	a) Should background checks be required on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows?
No	b) Should citizens be allowed to carry concealed guns?
Yes	c) Should a license be required for gun possession?
Undecided	d) Do you support current levels of enforcement of existing state restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns?
Undecided	e) Do you support current state restrictions on the purchase and possession of guns?
	f) Other or expanded principles

Health Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding health.
	a) Ensure that citizens have access to basic health care through managed care, insurance reforms, or state-funded care where necessary.
	b) Guaranteed medical care to all citizens is not a responsibility of state government.
	c) Limit the amount of damages that can be awarded in medical malpractice lawsuits.
	d) Allow patients to sue their HMOs.
	e) Require hospitals and labs to release reports on infections that are a risk to public health, while not compromising patient confidentiality.
	f) Legalize physician assisted suicide in Minnesota.
	g) Support allowing doctors to prescribe marijuana to their patients for medicinal purposes.
	h) Other or expanded principles
I support single payer universal health care.

Social Issues

Indicate which principles you support (if any) regarding social issues.
Yes	a) Should Minnesota recognize civil unions between same-sex couples?
Yes	b) Should same-sex couples be allowed to marry?
Yes	c) Should Minnesota provide state-level spousal rights to same-sex couples?
No	d) Do you support a moment of silence in public schools?
Undecided	e) Do you support voluntary prayer in public schools?
Yes	f) Do you support sexual education programs that include information on abstinence, contraceptives, and HIV/STD prevention methods?
No	g) Do you support abstinence-only sexual education programs?
Yes	h) Should the state government consider race and gender in state government contracting and hiring decisions?
Yes	i) Do you support affirmative action in public college admissions?
Yes	j) Should Minnesota continue affirmative action programs?
Yes	k) Do you support state funding of stem cell research?
Yes	l) Do you support state funding of embryonic stem cell research?
No	m) Do you support allowing pharmacists who conscientiously object to emergency contraception to refuse to dispense it?
n) Other or expanded principles
I am confused to what "e) Do you support voluntary prayer in public schools?" Students should have the right to pray in schools if they choose, but the school administrators should not require students to attend prayer. For example, is a student wished to do Friday Prayers, which happen at lunch time, the school should not stop the student, and meet their needs. Yet, a teacher can not require all of the students in the class to pray along with the student.
Legislative Priorities
Please explain in a total of 100 words or less, your top two or three priorities if elected. If they require additional funding for implementation, please explain how you would obtain this funding.
The big challenge that I see in the Legislature is to balance the 2 billion dollar deficit without cutting programs and services to the poor. As your State Representative, I would advocate that housing, jobs, youth programming, and programs to end poverty are an investment, not an expense. I will fight to secure general funds to sustain programs for education and social services, and work beyond party lines to create solutions to balance the budget, find funding for community programs, and bring landmark legislation to law. [ These taken from VoteSmart.org Farheen's primary opponent has this listed on their site: Mr. Hayden repeatedly refused to provide any responses to citizens on the issues through the 2008 Political Courage Test when asked to do so by national leaders of the political parties, prominent members of the media, Project Vote Smart President Richard Kimball, and Project Vote Smart staff. I consider Mr. Hayden's inaction to be yet another sign of local DFL corruption, ineptitude, and not truly standing for anything but getting elected. - KC ]

Dear Blog Reader, Over the course of this campaign, we’ve heard a lot of talk about oil pipelines in Alaska, “drill, baby, drill,” and even an unfortunate embrace of so-called “clean coal” technology, though no form of coal is ever truly “clean.” With less than one month to go before Election Day, we need to let our candidates know we’re demanding a comprehensive, modern, green energy policy that will put this country back on the right path in more ways than one. Right now, we can launch a new green energy plan for the US that is intentionally designed to meet five urgent needs at once. We can: tackle the rising price of fuel, a hardship for many American families, transition the US away from its dependence on foreign oil, push back against the perils of climate change, and reverse rising unemployment rates, which reached a five-year high in September. create real investment into our economy that will counter the ongoing Wall Street meltdown, and its impact on Main Street. While Co-op America members have been making green-energy changes in their lives for many, many years, the time is NOW for a major system change. We’re challenging each of you to come together with us and tell all presidential and congressional candidates that our country is ready for a clean energy infrastructure that makes it easier to live green. All of our candidates need to be reminded that if we do this – if we implement a comprehensive green energy policy that calls for energy efficiency, cleaner cars, and renewable solar and wind power – we’ll ALL reap the rewards of a cleaner environment, reinvigorated economy, and more secure future. When you click through to take our action, you’ll be prompted for your ZIP code, which will bring up all congressional and presidential candidates running for office in your area. Then you can add your own personal touch to our editable message, urging all of the candidates to endorse a greener energy platform. Please take this urgent action today. Send your message to the candidates now » For background on Co-op America’s clean-energy recommendations, check our latest editorial, in which we debunk the myths that can discourage progress on green energy, and outline the components that any elected leader should have in her or his energy policy. (Please post it widely online, send it to your local paper, and otherwise help us get the word out.) Then, click through to our action page for more information on what should NOT be included in our energy policy (off-shore drilling, oil-and-gas subsidies, new coal plants, risky nuclear plants), before using our form to send your own message to Congress. Thanks for joining with us to keep this critical issue at the top of our leaders’ minds, as we push for action now, and under the new administration in 2009. Here's to all you do, Alisa Gravitz, Executive Director, Co-op America P.S. Clean energy news: The solar energy tax credits were extended for eight years as part of legislation signed into law on October 3. You can now get 30% tax credits for solar installed on your home or business – without a cap on the amount of the credit. Thanks to all of our members who joined with us in pushing for these tax credits!

Tell your presidential and congressional candidates to support a truly green energy policy. Act now. » DONATE to our Climate Action Program Help us expand our work to build a greener energy future for America. Donate today » Join Co-op America to keep informed about our work to build a green economy. Receive a subscription to our Co-op America Quarterly, our green living newsletter Real Money, a copy of the National Green Pages™, and our Guide to Socially Responsible Investing. Your membership makes all of our work possible, and shows that more and more Americans are truly committed to a greener future. Join Now » Post our editorial, or submit it to your newspaper Co-op America's latest green-energy editorial explains our position on a truly green energy policy for America. We invite you to post it to your own Web site, link to us, or submit it to your local newspaper. (If you do any of the above, please let us know!) Read the editorial »

JOIN CO-OP AMERICA | DONATE TODAY | SEND THIS TO A FRIEND

Co-op America, 1612 K St NW Suite 600, Washington DC 20006 - (800) 58 GREEN - www.coopamerica.org

Offshore Drilling and American Political Party Stances

Since 1981, drilling in the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific off U.S. shorelines has been banned under a federal moratorium. Last week, in response to high gas prices and continued dependence on an oil-based economy, the Democrat-controlled House voted 236-189 to open these offshore areas to exploration and drilling. If passed into law, the House bill would allow oil drilling 50 miles from shore with a state's permission and 100 miles from shore without a state's permission. The bill would also remove restrictions on oil shale drilling in the western United States (which the National Wildlife Federation called a "double disaster" for our climate), eliminate some tax credits currently held by oil companies, and require that 15% of U.S. energy production be by renewable sources by 2020.
The Republican view: The McCain/Palin rallying cry has been "Drill, Baby, Drill!" House Republican leaders spent the summer holding weekly press conferences calling for resumed drilling. Sarah Palin, the Republican Vice-Presidential candidate, strongly supports oil exploration in her home state's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. John McCain - who asks crowds at his campaign rallies for their support for drilling for oil wherever they happen to be standing - states that he will "cooperate with the...Department of Defense in the decisions to develop these resources," illustrating his belief that U.S. energy policy and the invasion and occupation of oil-rich nations are clearly linked.	The Democratic view: The key word has been "compromise". House Speaker Nancy Pelosi traded support for a 27-year old moratorium on offshore drilling for slightly higher taxes on oil companies, who will likely immediately continue making record profits by passing increased costs onto customers. Instead of focusing on the need for new, truly clean energy sources, Barack Obama trumpets his willingness to work across the aisle on increasing vehicle fuel efficiency (instead of replacing polluting engines with replacement technologies) and further development of so-called "clean" coal. Obama's support for new coal development (and the mountaintop removal and strip mining we use to obtain it) is a step back to a 19th-century, not 21st-century, energy strategy.	The Green view: We oppose the toxic and environmentally-destructive national oil-based energy strategy. We agree with the experts who insist that new sources of domestic oil could not be discovered, processed, and refined within a decade. We urge immediate investment in strategies that can have both a short-term and sustainable impact on our national energy strategy, such as solar, wind, and other non-polluting alternative energy sources. As Green Party Presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney says, "Leave the Oil in the soil." We support leaving it in the soil, ocean floor, shale, and wherever else the oil parties imagine they might find it. Help the Green Party win investments in sustainable alternative energy sources by investing in the McKinney/Clemente campaign and the Green Party of the United States. Democrats have called for increasing investments in renewable energy sources by a paltry 15% over the next decade - we can make real changes if you pledge to increase your support of the Green Party and its candidates by 15% right now!

10 Reasons why offshore oil drilling is a BAD IDEA

Gas prices have been jumping over and under the $4 mark all summer, your grocery bills are soaring, and campaign ads are blasting you about the benefits of offshore drilling. So what's an average Joe or Jane supposed to believe? Will offshore drilling really make things better for you? What you're hearing on the news is pretty one-sided, and most reporters are talking about this issue like it makes perfect sense. Well, it doesn't. What can I say, sometimes dumb ideas get a lot of attention. That's exactly what's happening right now as President Bush has lifted the executive moratorium on offshore drilling, and Congress is being pushed to do the same. Let me take just a second to review the top 10 reasons offshore drilling is such a dumb idea: 10. Offshore oil drilling won't impact gas prices today, and it won't have a significant impact on gas prices in the future. 9. This is nothing more than a money grab by the oil companies - who are already making record-breaking profits. 8. We burn 25% of the world's oil here in the U.S., but we have only 3% of the world's oil reserves. So even if all offshore oil magically came to market today, the vast majority of our oil would continue to be imported, and we wouldn't see price relief at the pump. 7. The current moratorium was put in place decades ago to protect us from the danger of oil spills along our coastlines and beaches. 6. Burning fossil fuels like oil causes global warming, which causes stronger hurricanes, which will threaten the very offshore drilling rigs being proposed, which will contribute to even more global warming. 5. To avoid the worst impacts of global warming, we need to switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy within the next 10 years. The billions of dollars that would be spent on offshore oil drilling just postpones the inevitable transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy. 4. Oil exploration requires massive seismic testing - which threatens whales and dolphins. 3. Oil prices are set on the global oil market, so American oil is no cheaper than Saudi oil. We won't get a discount for oil drilled in the U.S. 2. We can't solve the world's energy problems with the same drilling that created them. 1. Renewable energy is available now, so it's time to walk away from fossil fuels and toward a clean energy future. Take Action >> make sure Congress hears from YOU about offshore oil drilling. Let's face it, there's really no good reason to drill offshore. More drilling is good for Big Oil, not for you and your family. We can't drill our way out of this mess - oil drilling is already at an all-time high and prices are still skyrocketing. As a matter of fact, even if we could tap into all of the energy stored in the Earth's reserves - coal, oil, and natural gas - it would equal the energy in just 20 days of sunshine. Tell Congress to look on the bright side to solve our energy crisis. It's time to invest in renewable energy and leave oil to the dinosaurs. It's time for an energy revolution. Power to the people, Melanie Duchin Global Warming Campaigner

Ways to Help Take Action Now Get the Facts Learn the truth about offshore drilling. Want to do even more? Get out there and blog, tell your friends, or write a letter to the editor. This is a war of words, and losing means increased global warming, oil spills, and beached whales and dolphins. We need YOUR help to beat back Big Oil's PR machine.

Minnesota 5CD GP Statement against Midtown Burner

In support of the Philips, Powderhorn, and Longfellow neighborhoods,
the Fifth Congressional District Green Party opposes development of
the Midtown Eco Energy power plant. Members of the Fifth Congressional
District Green Party are concerned with potential negative effects
from the proposed development as well as existing neighborhood
pollution levels.

The proposed development is within the East Phillips Neighborhood, an
area which is already one of the most polluted areas in Hennepin
county. This area was recently named an EPA "Superfund" site due to
Arsenic contamination, and has a high proportion of residents that
suffer from asthma. Locating this power plant in such a highly
polluted area raises questions of environmental justice and
constitutes a form of environmental racism.

###

Press contacts:
Kevin Chavis
612-729-0330
KevinChavis AT mngreens DOT org

Dan Dittmann
952-454-2377
DanDittmann AT mngreens.org

[WT논평]The coming crisis

By Daniel L. Davis(columnist)

For more than a decade, English petroleum geologist Colin Campbell has been sounding the warning bell about the coming of peak oil and its disturbing ramifications for the world. And in the past year, the GAO, the National Petroleum Council, and scores of other organizations and governments around the world have reported on the severe consequences the world might incur once the peak has been achieved.

The issue is not simply a concern that we will have to pay outrageous prices for a gallon of gas. If that were the worst of it, the situation would be difficult but manageable. The reality, however, goes deeper and is much more troubling. There are multiple problems affecting the world that are having a decidedly negative net effect: a global rise in demand for crude oil, the plateau in the production of crude oil (which may indicate the peak has already been reached) and continued global population growth. Together, these three factors are serving to shove the world into a crisis that has ominous possibilities.

When there isn’t enough oil to satisfy global demand, the price obviously rises. Perhaps less obvious, however, is the effect this price increase has on the world’s ability to produce food.

Every stage of the food production cycle is affected by petroleum and a rise in the price of a barrel of oil has compounding effects: It costs more to run the farm machinery, more to buy the fertilizer, more to take it to market and more for processing. In parts of the world where upwards of 75 percent of a family’s income goes to buying food, it results in social unrest and riots.

The United Nations estimates that global population is growing at the rate of 78 million people a year - roughly the equivalent of adding the population of Germany to the world every year. According to Energy Information Administration data released earlier this month, global petroleum production has been on a relatively level plateau for the past 44 consecutive months.

But at the same time, the economies of China and India have continued growing, which accelerates the consumption of petroleum-related products and increases the amount and quality of food each person eats. These three facts have conspired to produce a global shortage of crude oil which has exacerbated the world’s inability to feed itself. If the world cannot produce significantly more barrels of oil per day, there won’t be enough oil to go around or enough food for everyone to eat.

• 
  
  
  
  다가오는 석유 부족과 식량 위기
  대니얼 L 데이비스(美 칼럼니스트)
  
  영 국의 석유 지질학자 콜린 캠벨은 다가오는 석유 생산의 정점과 그로 인해 세계적으로 초래되는 불안한 결과에 대해 10년 이상 경고해 왔다. 지난해 회계감사국(GAO)과 미국석유협회 및 다른 수십 개 단체들과 세계 여러 나라 정부들은 석유 생산이 정점에 도달했을 때 세계에 초래될 가능성이 있는 심각한 결과에 관해 보고했다.
  
  이 문제는 단순히 한 갤런의 휘발유에 터무니없는 가격을 지불하게 되는 사태에 대한 우려가 아니다. 터무니없는 휘발유 가격이 최악의 상황일 경우 해결은 어렵지만 관리는 가능하다. 그러나 현실은 훨씬 심각하며 골치 아프다. 세계에 결정적으로 부정적인 영향을 미치고 있는 다수의 문제들이 존재한다. 문제 가운데는 세계적인 원유 수요 증가, 원유생산의 정체(정점에 이미 도달했다는 것을 나타낼 가능성이 있다), 세계 인구의 지속적인 증가 등이 포함된다. 이 세 가지 문제는 복합적으로 세계를 각종 불길한 가능성이 내포된 위기 속으로 몰아넣는 데 일조하고 있다.
  
  세계적인 수요를 만족시키기에 충분한 석유가 존재하지 않을 경우 가격은 분명히 오른다. 그러나 이러한 가격인상이 세계의 식량생산 능력에 미치는 영향은 덜 분명할 것이다.
  
  식 량 생산 주기의 모든 단계가 석유의 영향을 받고 있으며 배럴당 석유가격 인상은 깊은 영향을 미친다. 농장기계를 가동하고 비료를 구입하고 농작물을 시장에 출하하고 가공하는 데 더 많은 돈이 들어간다. 가계 수입의 최고 75% 이상이 식량 구입에 지출되는 세계의 몇몇 지역에서는 이러한 비용 인상이 사회불안과 폭동을 일으킨다.
  
  유엔은 세계인구가 매년 7800만명의 비율로 증가하는 것으로 추산한다. 대략 독일 만한 인구가 매년 세계에 추가되는 셈이다. 이달 초 발표된 에너지정보국의 자료에 따르면, 세계 석유 생산은 지난 44개월 동안 계속하여 비교적 정체상태를 유지해 왔다.
  
  그러나 동시에 중국과 인도 경제는 계속 성장하고 있으며 이는 석유 관련 제품들의 소비를 촉진하고 1인당 소비하는 식품의 양과 질을 증가시켰다. 이 3가지 사실이 복합적으로 작용하여 세계적인 원유 부족 사태를 빚었으며 이는 다시 세계의 식량공급 부족을 악화시키고 있다. 만약 세계가 하루 원유 생산량을 현저하게 증가시키지 못할 경우 유통되는 석유와 식량이 부족해질 것이다.
  
  역주=오성환 외신전문위원
  
  suhwo@segye.com
  
  해설판 in.segye.com/english 참조
  
  ▲peak:정점
  
  ▲trouble:당혹, 골칫거리
  
  ▲ominous:험악한, 불길한
  
  ▲plateau:평탄역, 정체상태, 고원
• 
  

• 기사입력 2008.05.29 (목) 19:13, 최종수정 2008.05.29 (목) 19:15
• 
  
• [ⓒ 세계일보 & Segye.com, 무단 전재 및 재배포 금지]

Tube envy

With higher fuel prices, an effective public transportation system is a must.

By John Sharkey

your humble correspondent here, checking in from beautiful (and, yes, rainy) London. The sites are nice and all, but the real attention-grabber so far has been the public transportation. Especially as we continue to haggle over new light-rail lines, it's important to keep some bigger perspective on what exactly makes a public transportation useful.

Of course, we're faced now with a greater need for decent transportation than ever before. Oil left $100 per gallon behind long ago, and the gas pump dishes out some serious damage. We aren't likely to see the return of $2 gas - worldwide demand probably isn't going to be plummeting any time soon. With that reality in mind, we desperately need to start re-evaluating how we deal with transportation and city planning issues in this country.

The United States has the least-dense cities in the world. New York, our most packed city, checks in at a fairly modest 40 people per hectare. European cities often crack 60 or 70, and major Asian cities like Hong Kong blow past 300. This default system of more sprawling cities makes our reliance on cars a necessity. When gas is cheap, that might not be much of a problem (environmental issues aside). Traffic is the worst of your worries. But with five-dollar gas, the problem is much more severe.

With an expensive-fuel future on the horizon, now is the time to re-evaluate how we utilize public transportation. The idea is a simple one: make public transportation more attractive than using a car. The methods, of course, can vary - part of the solution is to use concepts like congestion pricing that charge motorists who use busy roads during peak times. But just as important are the ways by which we improve the public transportation.

Ease of use is the most important factor. The Go-To system now in use on the Twin Cities' busses, and trains is an important step. (London uses an analogous system called Oyster cards.) But there is more to ease of use than just streamlining the payment system. The busses and trains need to run relatively frequently, and it needs to be easy to tell when the next one arrives.

One of the biggest hassles of using busses, as we all know, is the uncertainty. There's the scheduled time the bus is supposed to arrive, but there's always the chance it could be a few minutes early. That means, to ensure you don't miss your ride, you need to get to the stop far too early. The solution here is to increase frequency, lessening the penalty for missing a bus. If the next one is showing up five minutes later, you don't have to worry as much about being late for work. Again, the Twin Cities are doing a decent job on this front with Hi-Frequency lines, but more can be done.

The expansion of a rail system can, if executed correctly, be the biggest asset of a public transportation system. They're efficient, can be run on relatively exact schedules, and can run frequently. But they require extensive planning. At first glance, a map of London's tube system can be overwhelming, but after a trip or two it feels fairly intuitive. You can't design something like that piecemeal. It requires a long-term strategy to craft a rail system to adequately cover a major metropolitan area. The proposed light-rail line to St. Paul is a start, but if we're ever going to seriously create a system that can replace cars, it's going to take much more. It might seem expensive, but at this point there are no cheap options.

John Sharkey welcomes comments at jsharkey@mndaily.com.

Saudis Reject Bush Plea -- Oil Prices Soar Again; U.S. Halts Reserve Buys

Saudi Arabia rejected President Bush's appeals to increase oil production and the Energy Department announced it would halt shipments to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as oil barreled to a record close Friday.

The day's events meant no relief for U.S. motorists suffering pain at the pump.

Bush, visiting Saudi Arabia on Friday for the second time in five months, had hoped to use his oil industry background and ties to the Saudi leadership to persuade them to increase their current oil production of 9.15 million barrels a day. But despite receiving a red carpet welcome in Riyadh, where gasoline costs 50 cents a gallon, Bush was rebuffed.

Saudi oil minister Ali al-Naimi said his nation already had marginally boosted production by about 300,000 barrels a day, as of May 10, to meet world demand, as they see it. This will boost output to 9.45 million barrels a day in June.

"Supply and demand are in balance today," al-Naimi told a news conference. "How much does Saudi Arabia need to do to satisfy people who are questioning our oil practices and policies?"

Stephen Hadley, the president's national security adviser, briefed reporters after the private meetings between Bush and King Abdullah at the king's ranch.

"What they're saying to us is ... Saudi Arabia at the present time does not have customers that are making requests for oil that they are not able to satisfy," Hadley said. And despite the production boost announced "in order to meet the demand of their customers, in their judgment ... even increased production under this policy would not result in dramatic ... reduction of gas prices in the United States."

Economists say prices are being driven up by increased demand, not slowed production. Energy-guzzlers China and India are stretching supplies.

While the overtures to Saudi Arabia failed, the Bush administration said it is suspending oil deliveries into the government's Strategic Petroleum Reserve for the remainder of the year.

The move came days after Congress passed legislation requiring Bush to temporarily halt shipments into the reserve in hopes of lowering gasoline prices. Although the president dismissed the idea as a small step that would have little affect on U.S. gas prices, Bush is expected to sign the bill.

The Energy Department moved to comply with the congressional mandate, saying it will not sign six-month contracts to have begun starting July 1, for the acceptance of 76,000 barrels of oil a day.

The department also plans to defer deliveries under existing contracts once the legislation passed by Congress late Wednesday becomes law.

The reserve, a system of salt caverns on the Louisiana and Texas Gulf coast, is 97 percent full, holding 701 million barrels of crude. The stockpile, currently sufficient to cover two months of oil imports, is kept as a cushion in case of a major disruption of oil supplies.

Both the House and Senate by lopsided votes this week directed the president to suspend the oil SPR shipments with both Republicans and Democrats saying it made no sense for the government to take oil at today's prices. The crude oil would better be left on the market to increase commercial supplies, they said.

In New York on Friday, oil traders were not impressed by the news of Saudi Arabia's small production increase and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve moratorium. They did what they've been doing for months now, and pushed crude oil and gasoline futures to new highs.

The price for a barrel of benchmark light, sweet crude for June delivery jumped $2.17 to settle at a record close of $126.29 on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Earlier in the session, prices surged to $127.82 a barrel, also a record high.

--------------------

Pump pressures

Memphis gas

Here are the most recent average prices per gallon in the Memphis market:

FRIDAY THURSDAY

Regular unleaded

$3.623 $3.614

Mid-Grade

$3.835 $3.825

Premium

$4.019 $4.009

Diesel

$4.327 $4.293

Note: Gas price includes 18.4 cents federal tax, 21.4 cents Tennessee tax (18.4 cents on diesel).

Friday's U.S. oil price: $126.29 a barrel for light sweet crude, June delivery, up $2.17 on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Get it Cheap

Among the least expensive places in Greater Memphis to buy fuel (per gallon over the past 72 hours):

$3.49: Texaco, 4286 Macon.

$3.54: Texaco, Hickory Hill & Winchester; Citgo, 5930 Winchester, and Winchester & Old Getwell.

$3.55: Murphy USA, 6506 Memphis-Arlington, and Citgo, 6505 Memphis-Arlington, both in Bartlett.

Sources: American Automobile Association Daily Fuel Gauge Report via Oil Price Information Service, Associated Press, MemphisGasPrices.com.

- Mark Watson

--------------------

Originally published by From Our Press Services / Mark Watson contributed .

(c) 2008 Commercial Appeal, The. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.

Peak Oil Resolution Passes Minnesota House

ST. PAUL – Today, the Minnesota House of Representatives passed the Peak Oil Resolution (HF995/SF1948) memorializing the Governor to take action to prepare a plan of response and preparation to meet the challenges of peak oil.

"Global demand for oil is rising while supply is flattening out," said Hilty, Chair of the House's Energy Finance and Policy Committee. “The inevitable, and most likely imminent, decline in global petroleum production provide us with an overdue wake-up call. As policy-makers and private citizens, we need to develop a plan of response and preparation to meet the unprecedented challenges of peak oil."

This resolution is a follow-up to several hearings held by Energy Committee on peak oil. The resolution declares that the State Legislature supports: 1) adoption of a global Oil Depletion protocol, calling for greater transparency, stability and equity regarding access to petroleum; 2) a statewide assessment to evaluate the impact of peak oil on every area of state activity; and 3) recommended funding and direction by the Governor to state agencies for the development of a response plan.

"This resolution will compel us to look at the role of local units of government and starting addressing some fundamental logistical questions that will require considerable planning," said Rep. Hilty. "For instance, we need to start looking at the implications for the economy. Petroleum not only provides more than 95% of transportation fuels, it is also the feedstock for virtually all plastics and petrochemicals. It is literally what fuels the global economy. There is really almost no sector of the economy that will not be adversely affected by the rise in price and decline in availability of petroleum products. Clearly, we need to prepare for our future by investing in alternative energy sources, but it is vital that all of the implications of the inevitable decline in petroleum production and considered and planned for. This is an important first step."

Ahhhh -- the hate!

It's so easy

But if Bush/Cheney were out of office today
and if Obama or McKinney or even Nader was president
what would fundamentally change?

The food we eat, the fuel that heats our homes
our transportation to work, the clothes we wear
the internet that publishes our e-verses
all are products of the capitalist/petroleum-based
empire of wealth

You can't escape it even if you don't own a car
That carrot you put in your vegetable soup was shipped from California
The electricity that enables you to read this message
was generated at great cost to the environment
and at great profit to some network
of global corporations

The hate you feel for the president or anybody else
might as well be directed at your own sorry self
It's a big dead end and a waste of emotional energy

We really ought to free ourselves from
the politics of power and personality

And we can't be free until we until we stop hating and start loving

OK maybe we can't love Bush
or rightwing talk radio hosts

but we can love each other, and ourselves, and the earth
while acknowledging our weaknesses as individuals
our dependence on the economic systems we are seeking to transform
and our complicity in this project called society

Somebody once said "living well is the best revenge"

I think if we live like we're free, and love like we're free
then justice MAY follow

Of course, if somebody is pointing a gun at you,
all feel-good philosophical bets are off

But while we have the luxury to do so

Consider

-- Holle Brian

SMSC to install a wind turbine next to pow wow grounds

This summer the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community will begin the installation of a 2-megawatt wind turbine next to its pow wow grounds.

Several years ago, the SMSC installed a wind anemometer to determine if a wind turbine would yield satisfactory results. The results were encouraging, so the project moved forward.

The center hub will stand 262.4 feet tall and be visible for miles around. The three blades will be 229.6 feet in length and will function like a propeller.

The wind turbine has little environmental impact. It is not located near a major bird or bat migratory flyway.

This single turbine will supply enough energy for a significant percentage of the SMSC residential energy demand. Energy created by the turbine will be metered as it enters a nearby electrical substation that provides electricity to the SMSC and the surrounding area. The generated energy will likely be offset against SMSC residential energy costs.

Like many, the SMSC faces growing energy demands and dependence on outside sources for that energy. Environmental impacts associated with conventional energy sources are known to be destructive to the earth.

In response, the SMSC has actively explored local options to supply its energy demands. This focus will reduce some of the environmental impacts associated with conventional energy sources like natural gas and oil.

Most of the solutions being pursued by the SMSC do not require extensive infrastructure. Since initial investment costs are recouped over the life of the project, especially with rising conventional energy costs, other options are preferred by the SMSC. Minnesota is the third largest producer of wind energy in the nation, behind Texas and California. The state of Minnesota has set renewable energy standard that requires 25 percent of the state's energy to come from renewable sources by 2025. The SMSC wind turbine is another example to meet that goal.

The wind turbine is one of several SMSC energy initiatives already underway.

The SMSC is a major partner in Koda Energy, a joint venture with Rahr Malting of Shakopee to produce heat and electricity by burning agricultural by-products and grown energy crops. This stable, clean-energy production facility will be operational by December 2008 and could supply up to 75% of the SMSC’s energy needs for housing.

Another innovative project will soon convert the SMSC’s waste motor oil and vegetable oil to heat buildings.

Currently waste oil is hauled away; but by fall 2008, some SMSC spaces will be partially heated by waste oil. Using waste oil for heat reduces the use of natural gas. A project to convert 28,000 gallons of waste vegetable oil each year into bio-diesel for use in SMSC vehicles and equipment is also underway.

The SMSC fire station addition scheduled for completion in June 2008 has incorporated efforts to utilize the free energy of the sun.

Four skylights with daylight harvesting sensors will light a training room and equipment bay, reducing daytime energy usage. Six solar cells on the roof will capture energy to heat water for showers and equipment washing, reducing the use of natural gas.

The new ice arena currently under construction will also feature skylights specifically designed to compliment the arena use. Between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays, the arena typically will not have a lot of use. By using skylights and daylight harvestings during these non-peak hours, energy consumption for lighting will be reduced by about 50 percent.

Another energy saving feature of the SMSC's new ice arena will capture waste heat from the refrigeration compressors used to cool the rink floor and use it to heat the arena seats. Dispersing heat in spectator spaces reduces the need to heat the entire arena. This reduces energy consumption and makes the arena more comfortable for guests.

-- Shawn Hogendorf

source: http://plamerican.com/news/environment/smsc-install-wind-turbine-next-pow-wow-grounds-5508

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux to build a Wind turbine

This summer, the Shakopee Mdewakanton Dakota Community will begin installation of a 2-megawatt wind turbine next to its powwow grounds that it says will supply enough energy for a significant percentage of the Prior Lake tribe’s residential energy demand.

Several years ago the tribe installed an anemometer to determine if a wind turbine would yield satisfactory results. Results were encouraging so the project moved forward, said the tribe.

The center hub will stand 262.4 feet high and be visible for miles. The three blades will be 229.6 feet in length.

The tribe said the wind turbine will have little environmental impact.

The wind turbine is one of several Mdewakanton energy initiatives already under way. The tribe is a major partner in Koda Energy, a joint venture with Rahr Malting of Shakopee to produce heat and electricity by burning agricultural byproducts and energy crops. The production facility is scheduled to be in operation by December and could supply up to 75 percent of the community's energy needs for housing. Another project will soon convert the community's waste motor oil and vegetable oil to heat buildings. Waste oil is hauled away. But by fall, some community spaces will be partially heated by waste oil. A project to convert 28,000 gallons of waste vegetable oil each year into biodiesel for use in community vehicles and equipment is also under way.

The community fire station addition scheduled for completion in June has incorporated efforts to utilize the energy of the sun. Four skylights with daylight-harvesting sensors will light a training room and equipment bay, reducing daytime energy usage. Six solar cells on the roof will capture energy to heat water for showers and equipment washing, reducing the use of natural gas.

A new ice sheet addition to the community’s ice arena under construction will also feature skylights specifically designed to complement the arena use. Between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. weekdays, the arena typically will not have a lot of use. By using skylights and daylight harvestings during these non-peak hours, energy consumption for lighting will be reduced by about 50 percent, the tribe said.

The ice arena will also capture waste heat from the refrigeration compressors used to cool the rink floor and use it to heat the arena seats. Dispersing heat in spectator spaces reduces the need to heat the entire arena.

source: http://www.shakopeenews.com/news/general_news/wind_turbine_be_built_tribe-5587