Green Blog Feeds

Venice, Louisiana, proudly calls itself the world’s “Fishing Capital” but as the Memorial Day holiday weekend gets under way, there are times when it seems journalists outnumber anglers in this steamy bayou town. There are also lots of fishing and charter guides with no or few clients.

Venice caters to recreational anglers in pursuit of legendary game such as redfish and it is suffering as the spill spreads from the ruptured well out in the Gulf of Mexico.

I have spoken to several fishing guides over the past couple of days and they all complain about BP — held squarely responsible for the mess — the situation, and the numerous clients who keep canceling their trips.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced on Friday that it was extending the closed fishing area to about 25 percent of the Gulf from around 19 percent before, dealing a further blow to both commercial fishermen and sport angling guides.

But what surprises me as someone who just arrived here a couple of days ago is the trickle of boats still leaving the Venice Marina with angling clients. They seem to be going either close inshore or very far because of the closures.

Several of the guides I spoke to said there were still inshore areas open to fishing though one said, “We have to work harder for the fish because the good areas we normally go to are closed.” Some grumbled that the media coverage was obscuring this fact.

Guide Jeff Fuscia , while loading his 24-foot (7-1/2 meter) boat onto a trailer, told me on Friday his clients that morning had taken their limit of five redfish each and had released several more. But another guide told me while fueling up his large boat that he was going out 130 miles (215 kms) to get well beyond the restrictions.

This is all very frustrating especially as this is the start of the peak sport fishing season, which runs until early September.

Even more worrying perhaps is the uncertainty over the spill and the impact it could have on Gulf fish stocks in the long run, not least because it has been unleashed just as many species start to spawn.

(

Back in the 60’s, in efforts to help heal a skin condition, my family doctor advocated a high level of sun exposure and UV treatments. Thinking that the sun could only help improve my condition – there were many intentional sun exposures, skin burnings/peelings, convertible top-down rides and sun lamp exposures. Fast forward about 25 years! The sun/UV exposure therapy started to reap negative benefits in my late 40’s – the generation of keratoses started and continued well into my 50’s. By my late 50’s – the crown jewel of skin cancer manifested itself. When I had my skin checked by my dermatologist, he urged me to have a biopsy of a suspicious darkened skin patch on the side of my forehead. Three days later I remember getting the call at work from my dermatologist – “It’s a melanoma and you have to get it out – fast!” My life immediately was placed on hold for three weeks until the surgery. With support and guidance from my wife Marisa, who was an oncology nurse, along with my dermatologist and cosmetic surgeon – the melanoma was removed successfully.

Since that time, I have become an advocate for what I call “sun sense” – especially for young children and adults. Our schools need to take sun safety seriously and run programs designed to make students aware of the damaging effects of the sun – encouraging “sun sense.”

To help foster this action, I have written several safety columns in cooperation with my dermatologist for science teachers on how to help students understand the causes, risks and preventative actions needed to help prevent skin cancer – especially at their young age. EPA programs like SunWise and the public health campaign of Don’t Fry Day also help spread the word about this ever increasing problem.

My own lifestyle has changed dramatically as a result of dodging this bullet. I am always searching the Internet for mainstream and alternative health actions to try and help rectify the damage done to my skin. With semiannual skin inspections by my dermatologist, juicing key fruits and vegetables, supplementing with Vitamin D, smart UV clothing, sunscreen and more, I attempt in earnest to reduce and repair damage done as much as possible. In addition, I remain vigilant and missionary in helping to get the word out there – covering up is good sun sense!

Learn how to do full body scans at: www.aad.org/public/exams/self.html

About the author: Dr. Ken Roy is a melanoma skin cancer survivor. He is known as the “safety marshal.” He is an environmental health and safety compliance officer for a public school district in Connecticut, safety consultant and author/columnist worldwide. He is a staunch advocate for what he calls “sun sense.” As part of his advocacy and protection, he wears wide brim western-style hats – thus the “safety marshal” persona was created!

Hi! I’m Anne Keisman and I work on the Be Out There campaign at the National Wildlife Federation (NWF). Sometimes I can’t believe my luck – every day I am tasked with coming up with new ways to inspire people – especially parents and children — to go outside and play. I’m excited to partner with Don’t Fry Day to spread the word about sun safety. At NWF, we love to promote the positive side of the sun. It helps green things grow, keeps animals warm, and lets us see the world around us.

And children love the sun too. From the moment they can wield a crayon, plump yellow suns show up in their drawings – right next to the fluffy white clouds!

But — like many things in nature — the sun can be dangerous if we don’t take precautions. If you know the facts about protecting your family, you won’t have to be anxious when your family heads out to the beach or the park.  Once you’re protected from UV rays, pledge to spend more time outside with your family. Kids today spend twice as much time indoors as their parents did, missing out on the simple pleasures and lasting mental and physical health benefits of daily outdoor time.

NWF recommends that parents give their kids a “Green Hour” every day — time for unstructured play and interaction with the natural world. Be Out There’s practical tools for families, schools and communities make being outdoors a fun, healthy and automatic part of everyday life.

Stumped for ideas for outdoor fun? Check out National Wildlife Federation’s Summer Guide and our Green Hour activities for great tips for your family.

And on June 26, camp under the stars – in your own backyard! Join the Great American Backyard Campout.

Have fun in the sun!

About the author: Anne Keisman is Senior Associate Editor for the Be Out There Campaign at the National Wildlife Federation. Follow her at www.twitter.com/greenhour.

The giant Gulf of Mexico oil spill is breaching some of the apparently threadbare defenses that are being used contain it.

The National Wildlife Federation took a group of journalists on Thursday on a tour of some of the affected south Louisiana wetlands. Scientists on the tour took samples of oil that have washed into wild cane fields that tower more than 10 feet above the water.

The smell of oil hung thickly in the humid air and its presence was clear at the base of the green cane and reeds, which was darkly discolored.

Many of these small islands of wetlands were surrounded by the white protective boom which has been laid out to prevent the oil from seeping in. Clearly, the oil was flowing beneath it and/or washing over it, a point underscored by the dark splotching on the boom itself.

It is a well-established fact that this is  not 100 percent effective. The boom in this case, I was told, is absorbent boom, which is designed to repel water and soak up oil.

But with more oil expected to come in from the Gulf, the boom effort seemed almost futile.

Photo shows scientist Douglas Inkley of the National Wildlife Federation pulling a broken oil boom on an island impacted by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in Barataria Bay, Louisiana May 25, 2010. REUTERS/Lee Celano

Louisiana walruses? Seals swimming along the Gulf Coast?

These creatures normally live in the Arctic Ocean, not the Gulf of Mexico, but they’re listed as “sensitive biological resources” that could be affected by an oil spill in the area in a document filed by BP last June with the U.S. Minerals Management Service. More than a month after BP’s Deepwater Horizon rig blew out and sank on April 20, the British oil giant’s regional spill response plan drew some severe criticism from the watchdog group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

One problem with BP’s nearly 600-page spill response plan? “It was utterly useless in the event of a spill,” Jeff Ruch, PEER’s executive director, said by telephone. His group, which acts as a kind of safe haven for government whistle-blowers, detailed what it called “outright inanities”  in BP’s filing and the government’s approval of it.

PEER noted BP’s plan referred to “sea lions, seals, sea otters (and) walruses” as wildlife that might be affected in the Gulf of Mexico, and suggested this reference was taken from a previous plan for Arctic exploratory drilling, where these animals could be affected.

The BP plan lists a Japanese shopping and search website as a link to one of its “primary equipment providers” for rapid deployment in the event of a spill in the Gulf of Mexico. And it directs its media spokespeople never to make “promises that property, ecology or anything else will be restored to normal.”

Ruch said the plan contains no information about tracking sub-surface oil plumes from deepwater blowouts or preventing disease transmission to captured animals in rehab facilities, a serious risk after the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill.

The section on “worst case discharge” estimates a maximum spill of 177,400 barrels in the Gulf of Mexico. A panel of U.S. experts estimated that as of May 17, there were at least 130,000 barrels of oil on the surface of the Gulf of Mexico and a similar amount had been skimmed off the surface or evaporated, making a total of at least 260,000 barrels from the Deepwater Horizon spill. As of May 27, the broken well was still leaking.

Photo credits: REUTERS/Stringer (Walrus swims in the pool at Moscow’s zoo, February 28, 2001)

REUTERS/Hans Deryk (U.S. veterinarians bathe a brown pelican at Fort Jackson Wildlife Rehabilitation Center in Buras, Louisiana, May 15, 2010)

In times of uncertainty, the natural tendency for people is to look for ways to limit expenses. Whether you’re a recent graduate just venturing into the workforce, whether you are a small business owner who has seen limited economic activity in your shop, or whether you’re the head of a household concerned about the future, you’re probably looking at ways to save money right now.

As we look for savings in our daily lives, we should start by looking at our everyday activities at home. How can we save water? For example, taking short showers instead of baths conserves water and saves money. How can we save energy? Using energy efficient appliances saves energy and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. How can we generate less waste? How can we reuse what we have? The fact is that all these steps to save money are also green actions. In other words, by saving greenbacks, we are also going green and protecting the environment all in one! Furthermore, many of those green actions can also be taken at the community level as we develop smart strategies for a sustainable future.

So, as we actively pursue a green lifestyle, why not take a few minutes to share with us how you plan on going green? Visit our Pick5 Web page where you be able to get information on how people from all over the world are joining efforts to become true environmentalists. You won’t have to drive a car nor fly to a faraway destination. The information is just one click away.

Ultimately, this saving trend may be a blessing in disguise.

About the author: Lina Younes has been working for EPA since 2002 and chairs EPA’s Multilingual Communications Task Force. Prior to joining EPA, she was the Washington bureau chief for two Puerto Rican newspapers and she has worked for several government agencies.

En tiempos de incertidumbre, la tendencia natural de las personas es buscar maneras para limitar sus gastos. Independientemente si uno es una persona recién graduada que entra a la fuerza laboral, o un pequeño comerciante que ha visto actividad limitada en sus negocios, o un padre de familia preocupado por el futuro, probablemente usted está buscando maneras de ahorrar dinero ahora mismo.

A medida que buscamos ahorros en nuestra vida diaria, deberíamos empezar por analizar nuestras actividades cotidianas en nuestro hogar. ¿Cómo podemos ahorrar agua? Por ejemplo, si toma una ducha rápida en vez de un baño de tina conserva agua y ahorra dinero. ¿Cómo podemos ahorrar energía? Si utiliza enseres eléctricos eficientes, puede ahorrar energía y reducir emisiones de gases con efecto invernadero. ¿Cómo podemos generar menos desechos? ¿Cómo podemos reutilizar lo que tenemos? La realidad es que estos pasos sencillos para ahorrar dinero son acciones denominadas como “verdes”. En otras palabras, el ahorrar dinero puede conducir a actividades sostenibles beneficiosas para el medio ambiente simultáneamente. Además muchas de estas acciones verdes tomadas a nivel comunitario pueden fomentar el desarrollo de estrategias inteligentes para el desarrollo sostenible en el futuro.

Por lo tanto, si quiere emprender un estilo de vida sostenible, ¿por qué no toma un momento para compartir con nosotros lo que planifica hacer? Visite nuestra página Web Pick5 (Elija 5) para obtener información acerca de cómo personas alrededor del mundo se están uniendo a estos esfuerzos como verdaderos ambientalistas. No tiene que manejar un auto ni volar a un destino lejano para llegar. La información está al alcance de sus manos. Sólo haga clic.

En fin de cuentas, esta tendencia ahorrista puede ser una bendición después de todo. Como reza el dicho, no hay mal que por bien no venga.

Sobre la autor: Lina M. F. Younes ha trabajado en la EPA desde el 2002 y está a cargo del Grupo de Trabajo sobre Comunicaciones Multilingües. Como periodista, dirigió la oficina en Washington de dos periódicos puertorriqueños y ha laborado en varias agencias gubernamentales.

– Rona Fried, Ph.D., is CEO of SustainableBusiness.com, a news and networking site for green businesses: including a green jobs service and a green investing newsletter.  Any views expressed here are her own. —

Before the catastrophic BP oil drilling failure, polls showed that Americans favored oil drilling as a safe way to increase our energy independence. This was after decades of polls trending in the opposite direction.

Are Americans learning something from this?

I submit that Americans have become too trusting and complacent toward multinational corporations – will this be a wake-up call? Since the Obama Administration came into office, we’ve seen stark reminders of corporate greed and lack of appropriate regulatory oversight in just about every industry – the recent coal mining accidents, the outrageous behavior of Wall Street firms, a health care industry that raises premiums 40 percent even in the face of regulation, and now an oil industry that proves it’s completely unprepared to deal with an accident.

It’s bad enough that BP and the U.S. government have no idea how to stop or contain the oil spill, but why couldn’t they protect the shorelines and wetlands from the inevitable drift of oil?

Is it too much to ask that before oil drilling is approved that a plan be in place to prevent it from reaching our shores?

Is it too much to ask that before oil drilling is approved that best available technologies to deal with an accident be identified, purchased and stockpiled?

Now is NOT the time to evaluate and research various oil dispersants! Why wasn’t this done long ago? The least toxic oil dispersant – or better yet, a nontoxic biodegradable substance – should have been integrated into protocol by now.

Watching television footage of the spill, it’s alarming to see people using garden shovels to lift oil drenched sand and put it in plastic bags!  Is this our best available “technology?”

Obviously, there’s been no effort to develop appropriate, effective technologies. The same methods used in the Exxon Valdez spill – that didn’t work –are being used today. Using paper towels to remove the oil from animals’ bodies, using flimsy booms to protect the shore, and using dispersants that are known to be toxic to the very ecosystems we’re trying to protect.

It’s high time we focus on developing much more advanced, non-toxic technologies in addition to extensive implementation plans, or sorry, no oil drilling allowed.

We’ll see whether Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal changes his mind about promoting oil drilling versus an emphasis on energy efficiency and renewable energy to solve our nation’s energy needs.

Although he voted against the stimulus bill as part of the Republican block and criticizes “big government” and deficits, he’s being extremely aggressive in obtaining every conceivable avenue for disaster funding for his state.

But his idea for ameliorating this spill is a good one – build barrier islands off the coast to stop the oil from reaching the shore. Barrier islands would not only protect the coast from oil spills, they would help prevent another Katrina by buffeting strong winds and tides.

Now, the idea is being researched for potential negative impacts on currents, coastal erosion, and wildlife habitat. Again, why wasn’t this researched and a plan put in place a long time ago? Why are people scrambling to figure it out now?

Even worse is the inaction and utter lack of emergency response. Jindal has been asking for dredging to build barrier islands for two weeks to no avail. BP commissioned private fishing boats to combat approaching oil, but didn’t bother to send them out to lay out the flimsy, “protective” boom until the oil came ashore.

President Obama says there’s a moratorium on new permits for offshore drilling, yet permits have been handed out since this accident occurred. And unbelievably, he hasn’t halted plans for Shell to drill in the Arctic this summer, where there’s absolutely no doubt that an accident would be catastrophic.

Imagine the same challenges as the Gulf, plus bitter cold, ice, extreme wind and wave conditions, 24-hour darkness for months and response equipment for a blowout of this size being weeks away.  Right now, Shell is scheduled to start exploratory drilling in early July.

We watch day after day after day expecting appropriate action, yet nothing happens – except for the oil leaching further and further into wetlands, coating untold thousands of sea turtles, pelicans (taken off the endangered species list this year!) and countless other animals.

And all we have to help them is paper towel.

Each week we write about the science behind environmental protection. Previous Science Wednesdays.

Have you heard about geoengineering? It has been around as a concept for over a decade, but has come into the forefront recently because of a Royal Society report last fall and a new book. It is offered as a solution to global climate change, one of the biggest sustainability issues.

The idea behind geoengineering is that planet earth came to its present state because humans engineered natural systems on a large scale. For example, humans changed the flow of rivers. We straightened them, dammed them, diverted them, reversed them. Humans changed the landscape: cut down forests, plowed the soil, blew up hills and mountains. Humans changed the atmosphere. We sent toxic wastes skyward, spewed out CO2 from combustion, filled the skies with particles.

In short, we engineered the planet on a very large scale.

Unfortunately, these projects had unintended consequences such as poor water quality or decreased quantity, land erosion and loss of nutrients in the soil, global climate change. So, a kind of large-scale reverse engineering might be in order to fix these problems.

In particular, geoengineering has been offered as a possible way to reverse the effects of climate change. For example, geoengineers have suggested :

• fertilizing the ocean to increase the growth of algae which take up CO2 and give off oxygen as they photosynthesize
• putting huge mirrors into orbit to reflect back some of the warming sunlight
• seeding the clouds so it would rain when and where wanted
• pumping CO2 deep into the earth or ocean

All this sounds like science fiction, but it is proposed by perfectly objective scientists/engineers. The concern is that someone will come along and say let’s “just do it.” There may or may not be dire consequences from “just doing it.” This is where science comes in.

Because of the importance and scale of these issues, we need to gather the knowledge to make intelligent decisions. Ignorance is not bliss and must be erased in the light of facts.
In the case of geoengineering, we must neither avoid research in this area just because it seems like a science fiction solution to our climate problem, nor should we embrace it as a quick fix and neglect the long term action of lowering and controlling emissions. Just like steroids’ quick fix, these solutions may have dire consequences.

About the Author: Dr. Barbara Karn is a scientist in EPA’s National Center for Environmental Research and a regular Science Wednesday contributor.

Another oil company besides BP is drawing the ire of environmental groups this month. The Norwegian-based Statoil is under fire for development of the oil sands of Alberta Canada, a bi-weekly analysis of companies in the news by ASSET4 data providers shows.

Here is a breakdown of the companies that made headlines May 8 to May 21 for winning or losing credibility based on environment-related activity.

Company selections were made by Christopher Greenwald, director of data content at ASSET4, a Thomson Reuters business that provides investment research on the environmental, social and governance performance of major global corporations. These ratings are not recommendations to buy or sell.

Here are the recent hits and misses:

Statoil

Statoil, the Norwegian oil company that has been praised for its work in carbon sequestration in the North Sea, has joined Shell and BP as yet another oil company coming under criticism at its shareholder meeting for the company’s involvement in the Canadian oil sands.  Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Federation had put forth a proposal demanding the company leave the oil sands.

Although the measure was defeated by over 98 percent of the shares, the NGOs claimed success in raising the issue to the awareness of shareholders and the media, and the measure received10 times as many votes from shareholders compared to the previous year. Greenpeace Canada recently outlined the significant projected growth of oil exports from the Canadian tar sands in a new study entitled, “Tar Sands in Your Tank.”

The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China

The ICBC has agreed to provide $500 million in funding for the controversial Gibe 3 dam project in Ethiopia. Environmental concerns had delayed the project and prevented the World Bank and the African Development Bank from investing in the project. Environmentalists warn that the dam will destroy the biodiversity around Lake Turkana, the world’s largest desert lake, and will lead to the displacement of up to 500,000 individuals in the region.

Vodafone and BT Group

A recent study published by a coalition of environmental groups in China has linked both Vodafone and BT Group to suppliers who have been implicated in cases of heavy metals pollution. The study calls on the companies to take greater responsibility for their sourcing of components based on environmental factors.

Canfor, Cascades, West Fraser Timber, and Weyerhaeuser were among 20 member companies of the Forest Products Association of Canada which reached a landmark agreement with a coalition of environmental NGOs to prohibit logging on 29 million hectares of Boreal forest in Canada. The agreement also calls for the coalition to implement sustainable forestry practices in an area twice the size of Germany, leading the Pew Environmental Organization that helped broker the deal to characterize it as the “largest commercial forest conservation plan in history.”

Samsung

Samsung’s new Seek mobile phones offered by Sprint will be shipped in a post-paid box that allows consumers to ship their old phones and accessories to Samsung. Samsung will recycle all phones, batteries and accessories that it receives as part of the program to facilitate safe disposal of old cellular devices.

Alibaba.com

Jack Ma, Founder, Chairman and CEO of the leading Chinese internet retailer Alibaba.com announced at the company’s annual shareholder meeting that the company would commit to spend 0.3 percent of its revenue to fund conservation and environmental awareness initiatives in China and around the world. Ma, who is on the board of the Nature Conservancy, characterized the initiative as part of the company’s more general commitment to raising environmental awareness among its employees, customers and partners.

_______________________________

Photo shows Greenpeace protesters dressed as Statoil Chief Executive officer Helge Lund (L) and Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach holding a Norweigien flag dipped in oil outside the offices of Statoil Canada in Calgary, Alberta, May 17, 2010.  REUTERS/Todd Korol

Each week we write about the science behind environmental protection. Previous Science Wednesdays.

Congressional staff, physicians, members of industry, and the public health community gathered on Friday, May 21 at the inaugural   Air Science 40 briefing, an event co-sponsored by EPA, the American Heart Association (AHA) and the House Committee on Science and Technology in recognition of the 40th anniversary of EPA air pollution research.

At the seminar, leading scientists presented evidence that air pollution causes cardiovascular disease and death.

The news that air pollution impacts the heart may have been new to some, but for others it served as official affirmation of a scientific link that researchers have been building a case toward for several years.

Dr. Robert Brook, physician and researcher of cardiovascular medicine at the University of Michigan, presented an official AHA statement that emphasized the “causal relationship between PM2.5 exposure and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.”

Brook is lead author of the statement, which was produced by a large panel of scientific experts after an in-depth evaluation of the breadth of current scientific literature on the health impacts of air pollution.

Brook noted that the AHA statement panel reached consensus on the causal relationship between particulate matter and cardiovascular health independently from EPA, which reached a similar conclusion in its most recent Integrated Science Assessment for Particulate Matter (PM).

Dr. C. Arden Pope III, economist and environmental epidemiology researcher at Brigham Young University and co-author of the AHA statement, presented additional groundbreaking findings on the vast benefits of air pollution regulations to human health.

He shared his landmark 2009 finding that air pollution regulations over the past two decades have increased the average American life expectancy by “a half to a full year,” and discussed an array of other studies on air pollution’s impact on cardiac morbidity and mortality that have proved “reproducible and remarkably robust.”

The AHA statement and supporting science presented by Brook and Pope deems fine particle exposure a “modifiable factor contributing to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality,” and includes new recommendations to physicians on how to advise patients at high risk for air pollution health effects. The statement offers several practical suggestions for reducing particle exposure and limiting potentially harmful physical activity in relevant cases.

While science to support the link between air pollution and cardiovascular health is constantly evolving and developing, the conclusions presented Friday should be taken seriously, Brook said.

He emphasized one of the concluding sentences in the AHA statement presenting the scientific evidence linking cardiovascular with air pollution, which asserts: “at present, no credible alternative explanation exists.”

About the Author: Becky Fried is a science writer with EPA’s National Center for Environmental Research. Her OnAir posts are a regular “Science Wednesday” feature.

So, I am sitting in my Project 52, which those of you who spend time on whitewater rivers will know to be a kayak.  The river level is up, which makes for lots of company on the water and the guy I am chatting with asks me what I do for work.  “I work for EPA on water infrastructure sustainability.”  His reaction is typical – no idea what that means.  But he kayaks and has some interest in water and seems up for the explanation.

Most folks I know don’t think much about where their water comes from, where it ends up when it goes down the drain, or the extensive ’infrastructure’ systems that take care of all that.  The ones I have cornered – like that kayaker – now know that those ‘water infrastructure’ systems of pipes and treatment plants are in quiet crisis.  Our utilities have done a great job of providing us with safe water to drink and collecting and treating wastewater before discharge, usually into a nearby waterway (that some of us kayak in).  But many utilities have underinvested in renewing those systems.  And a BIG bill is coming due.

We need to start replacing that stuff at a rate that is sustainable.  I have heard estimates that we replace about 0.5% of water distribution pipes a year.  That would mean we expect those pipes to last, on average, for 200 years.  Not likely.  NOT sustainable…

Nationwide, annual utility revenues are roughly $25 billion less than what a sustainable replacement pace would require.  We can cover a good portion of that through efficiency and I coordinate a slew of programs to help utilities cut costs and make the most of every dollar.  But utility revenues – and so the price of water services – are also going to have to go up to close that gap.

So next time you hear that water or sewer rates might go up, think about how you depend on those services.  Think about how much you spend on cable T.V. or your cell phone (typically MORE than on water services).   Lots of folks have very tight budgets, no question –but if we want to continue to enjoy fabulous water services, we are all going to have to help keep our utilities ….‘afloat.’

To tune in more to the issue, join us at our facebook page:  EPA – Water Is Worth It.

About the Author:   Andy Crossland is the Sustainable Infrastructure Coordinator for EPA’s Office of Water.

Silicon Valley venture capital fund Khosla Ventures has roped in former British prime minister Tony Blair as senior advisor, hoping to leverage his international connections and geopolictical expertise.

Menlo Park, California-based Khosla Ventures is among the most active early stage investors in renewables and other alternative energy technologies. Founder Vinod Khosla, a well-known figure in the Silicon Valley technology circuit, himself was an early backer of biofuels.

Former British prime minister is now advising Khosla Ventures

Blair is not the first high-profile politician to join a Silicon Valley venture fund. Former U.S. Secreatry of State Colin Powell is closely associated with Kleiner Perkins and serves on the board of one of its portfolio companes, fuel cell maker Bloom.

Khosla Ventures' many clean technology investments include solar thermal company Ausra, geothermal company AltaRock and biofuels makers Mascoma, Coskata, Range Fuels and Verenium.

Blair said he met Khosla, who left Kleiner in 2004 to form Khosla Ventrures, at an environmental conference in the Middle East and was "just fascinated" with the VC's view of approaching climate change and green technology.

"He just fascinated me with his description of what they were trying to do and why they were trying to do it," Blair said.

For his part, Khosla said he wanted to tap into Blair's expertise in policy matters in Europe.

"In the Valley, we are techy nerds," Khosla said. "We don't really understand government, policy and global geo politics. I am relatively naive about Europe, China and lots of places. "

"So this is very complimentary in getting advice in areas we don't understand." he added.

A handful of oily sand grabbed from a Louisiana wetland brought back some strong memories for Earl Kingik. As a traditional hunter and whaler in Alaska’s Arctic, it reminded him of the Exxon Valdez spill. As he and other tribal leaders toured the U.S. Gulf Coast for signs of the BP oil spill, they worried that what’s happening now in Louisiana could happen if offshore drilling proceeds off the Alaskan coast.

“There’s no way to clean up an oil spill in the Arctic,” said Kingik, an Inupiat tribal member from Point Hope, Alaska. Compared to Louisiana, where the waters are relatively calm and cleanup equipment and experts are nearby, the Arctic Ocean is a hostile place for oil and gas exploration. The Arctic leaders made their pilgrimage to the Gulf Coast as part of a campaign to block planned exploratory drilling by Shell Oil  in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas.

“What I saw was devastating out there,” Martha Falk, the tribal council treasurer of the Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope in Alaska, said after the Gulf Coast tour by seaplane, boat and on foot. If the same thing occurred off Alaska, she said, “We would have to wait days and days and days for (cleanup) equipment to reach our area.”

The planned start of Alaska offshore drilling in July coincides with the spring hunt of the bowhead whale, a central event in the Inupiat culture, Falk said.

“The natural smell of the ocean was non-existent” along the Gulf Coast, said Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, an Inupiat from Nuiqsut, a tiny Alaskan village near the Beaufort Sea.  She was brought close to tears as she recalled the faces of the Gulf residents she saw on the tour. “It is a strong burden that I’ll carry with me the rest of my life.”

The Arctic native people headed for Washington DC after their Gulf  Coast tour to plead their case with members of Congress and Obama administration officials. The three members of the Alaskan congressional delegation generally favor offshore drilling as a way to ensure jobs and the continued operation of the Trans-Alaska pipeline. As a former mayor of her village, Rosemary Ahtuangaruak admits it’s a tough balancing act to juggle the oil industry’s potential impact on tribal culture with the creation of jobs for tribe members.

Environmental activists and members of Congress wrote to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar urging him to suspend Shell’s drilling plans in the Arctic Ocean, which includes the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. Salazar and others have said no new drilling will be approved until May 28, when a report on the BP spill is due.

Photo credits: Roger Herr via Alaska Wilderness League (along the U.S. Gulf Coast, May 18, 2010)

¿Sabía que a pesar de que es fácil de prevenir, hay más casos de cáncer de piel cada año en comparación a los casos de cáncer del seno, cólon pulmones, y próstata? ¿O que el cáncer de la piel está afectando a gente cada vez más joven? Eso se traduce a más de un millón de estadounidenses con cáncer cada año. Todo los años se designa el viernes antes del Día de Recordación por los Caídos como el “Día para no Freírse” (Día para Protegerse del Sol”) —como un recordatorio para ser prudente con el sol (Sunwise) y proteger su piel cuando disfrute del tiempo al aire libre.

¿Qué hace para prudente con el sol (Sunwise) y protegerse de la exposición excesiva al sol?

Did you know that although it’s easy to prevent, there are more cases of skin cancer each year than cases of breast, colon, lung and prostrate cancers combined? Or that skin cancer is affecting younger and younger people? That adds up to more than one million Americans getting skin cancer annually. Every year, the Friday before Memorial Day is designated as Don’t Fry Day as a reminder to be SunWise and protect your skin while enjoying the outdoors.

What do you do to be SunWise and protect yourself from overexposure to the sun?

Each week we ask a question related to the environment. Please let us know your thoughts as comments. Feel free to respond to earlier comments or post new ideas. Previous questions.

For a variety of reasons, a number of us here at the EPA face long daily commutes. Living in Frederick , MD and working in DC is not my idea of a sustainable lifestyle, but I am determined to reduce my overall carbon footprint by linking a number of different transportation modes.

Since moving in 2008, I have experimented with a number of different routes and transportation combinations including bicycle, car, MARC train and Metro .  I have gone back and forth between riding the C&O Canal and riding the back roads into DC.

Right now, I prefer riding on the road as the C&O can often be quite muddy, making travel time less predictable. My current system involves leaving my car at a nearby MARC station and riding into DC along some of the most beautiful country roads Maryland has to offer.

The ride is a little over 40 miles long and takes roughly 2.5 hours. To get home, I take the MARC train back to Frederick. The next day I take the train to work in the morning, and then ride back to my car after work. (Unfortunately, bicycles are not allowed on the MARC train, which would solve a number of logistical issues.)

In years past, Bike to Work Day bloggers have done an exceptional job of illustrating exactly how many pounds of CO2 can be reduced and how many calories can be burned by biking to work:

• Burning Environmentally Friendly Energy – Barbara Klieforth
• Bike to Work Day – Pat Childers
• Bike to Work Day – Aaron Ferster

As Bike to Work Day continues to gain popularity, I think the majority of us are aware that bicycle commuting is the better option not only for the environment, but also for our physical fitness. This awareness is also reflected in programs such as the Bicycle Tax Credit as well as health insurance companies covering exercise related expenses.
As an EPA employee, I feel a personal and professional responsibility to live an environmentally sustainable life. While living over fifty miles away from my place of work is not an ideal situation when it my carbon footprint, it is not a hopeless situation. There are options—and bicycle commuting is one of them.

About the author: Anna Kelso is an Environmental Protection Specialist in the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. In addition to her commitment to bicycle commuting, Anna is a mountain biker on the Gripped Racing Team and is a dedicated bicycle advocate within her community.

Some conservationists and experts on philosophy and ethics reckon that whales and dolphins are so intelligent that they should be given rights to life like humans. That could mean extra pressure on whalers in Japan, Norway and Iceland to end their hunts.

The focus on rights is a shift after conservationists successfully won a ban on almost all whale hunts from 1986, arguing that they had been harpooned close to extinction.

And in recent years (with evidence that some stocks are big enough to withstand hunts), many opponents say the moratorium should stay in place, arguing that shooting grenade-tipped harpoons at whales can mean a long, cruel death.

A conference in Helsinki starting today is called “Cetacean Rights” and is about “fostering moral and legal change”. The experts hope to come up with a declaration during the weekend — if the idea of special rights for marine mammals catches on, it could also limit the ability of marine parks to keep the mammals in captivity.

“We need a shift of values,” said Nicholas Entrup, head of the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society in Germany and Austria. The WDCS is organising the conference.

But would governments listen?

Many favour protection for whales and dolphins but opening the door to non-human rights might also lead to demands for more rights for other mammals, such as elephants, chimpanzees or maybe even your pet dog.

Vegetarianism would become the order of the day if  sheep or cows managed to pass the ovine and bovine equivalents of an IQ test. (I bet you’d be nervous if you went to a lab and the scientist told you: “Pass this simple test and your entire species will be saved: fail and we will eat you”.)

Many religions teach that humans are in a special category on Earth, more intelligent than other creatures.  But evolution shows a sliding scale of smartness — so should animals, starting with the giant marine mammals, have special rights?

(Picture: a humpback whale swims past the British Antarctic Survey’s Rothera base, January 2009. Alister Doyle, Reuters)

–Jean-Michel Cousteau is an environmentalist, documentary producer, president of Ocean Futures Society and the son of ocean explorer Jacques-Yves Cousteau. He has produced over 70 films, including the documentary series Ocean Adventures in 2006. Any views expressed here are his own. –

In the midst of desperate attempts to stem the flow of oil and the agony of waiting to understand its effects, we are left with simple questions like what exactly is happening to the waters of the Gulf of Mexico? And how quickly can we move from dependence on oil to a sustainable, renewable energy policy?

Absolutely no one knows the damage being done throughout the mile-deep water column. Crude oil and gas are gushing out at a few thousand pounds per square inch of pressure.

These very complex chemicals hit ice-cold water and travel one mile up to the surface and warmer water.  This is similar to an oil refinery process where temperature and pressure convert crude oil into all sorts of other compounds.  What are those compounds? Which ones are toxic? Which ones dissolve in water, which sink and which come to the surface?

I truly doubt anyone knows fully what is happening.

On the subject of unknown chemicals, dispersants are being used in massive quantities.  Dispersants are known to be harmful to aquatic life and some scientists believe that these chemicals are likely to be more harmful to organisms than is much of the oil.  In addition, dispersants only disperse; they don’t break down or detoxify.  So, here we are adding more pollutants to an already massive amount of pollution.  Why?  Only to make the oil less visible!

We all know this is a catastrophe that should not have happened.  We have not been prudent and we have not been diligent when it comes to oil drilling and extraction.  The technology is limited and the oversight is inadequate. But now we have the consequences to live with.

I was at the Exxon Valdez 11-million-gallon oil spill and watched rocks being scrubbed and birds cleaned by 12,000 people using paper towels. Over 21 years later, we still hear stories of the ecological impact and lives forever changed, for the worse. Some estimates claim the rate of the Gulf spill is the equivalent of the Exxon Valdez every four to seven days.

Of course we’re alarmed, but the present hysteria angers me.  How many times must we be surprised by the latest catastrophe?  Will only a Doomsday event motivate us?

It is crystal clear to me that we need to stand back and look at our attitudes and make fundamental changes.  Crisis management is no management at all.  Crises are absolutely inevitable if we continue to ignore the FACT that nature is far more complex and unpredictable than we can imagine.

We cannot change what has taken place but we must learn from it.

We must embrace a completely different perspective of how we work in, exploit and manage the natural world, far beyond simply the search for new technology.   We need a new philosophy about the appropriate use of technology and our relationship with nature.  We must remember that it is the natural world that keeps our planet habitable, and so far, most of our activities undermine the health and vitality of nature.

We need to come to terms with the fact that nature is far more complex than we understand and technology is far more limited than we want to believe.  Knowing the world is unpredictable means that our technologies need to be designed with multiple safeguards and multiple back up systems.  We need to anticipate the worst, plan everything to prevent it and then prepare another plan for when that prevention fails.

Constantly being surprised by catastrophe is stupid because unpredictable events in nature are totally predictable.

Actually, the entire process of evolution is based on the certainty that unpredictable events will occur and that back-up systems need to be in place to ensure the business of staying alive continues.  This is the lesson from 3.5 billion years of evolutionary progress.  Diversity and redundancy are safeguards against change.

In fact, the existence of sexual reproduction ensures that there are multiple back-up systems, manifested as each individual being slightly different, as our parent’s genetic information is combined in unique ways for whatever the future may hold.

We all know that for now, we must stop the leak, clean up the mess, monitor the impacts, stay calm, and stick to the facts. We need to take care of the thousands and thousands of people whose lives are being destroyed in a domino effect, and make sure the political, industry and management people who were incompetent are held responsible economically and politically.

Finally, we need to accept the fact that some areas of our planet are too valuable and too risky for us to meddle in.

I have spent much of my life on and in the sea. I know it well enough to know that I don’t know it at all. It is unpredictable and powerful.

Working in the ocean is dangerous business. At great depths, like a mile below the surface, it is beyond challenging.  The pressure is otherworldly. The temperature approaches freezing, cold enough to make methane gas combine with water in the consistency of a smoothie.  There is zero sunlight.  This is close to an impossible environment in which to work.  We knew this from the beginning.  Agencies responsible for permits, to oversee technological security and back up systems, and BP itself, knew these challenges; sadly, the ultimate test of any proposed fail-safe system is sometimes the reality of a disaster.

I believe drilling for oil in these regions is inappropriate across the globe, period.

Why would we treat the alien and hostile environment of the deep ocean with any less caution that we treat space, where we go only with multiple back-up systems?

We need to implement the precautionary principle, which requires the user to prove that any action taken will not cause harm.  If we are not convinced, then the project should be stopped, whatever the profit. The Hippocratic oath, “First, do no harm,” must be applied a priori to our natural environment.  When it comes to any action with a consequence to the environment, we must assume any industry is guilty until it proves itself innocent.

The Gulf of Mexico oil spill will be a tragedy of massive proportions to the natural world no matter what.  Our only redemption is to make it the catalyst for a philosophical change that will protect us all in the future.  For starters, in the meantime, we need an across the board inventory, from businesses and industry, to do what we can to reduce our need for oil.

No one has been harmed by extracting energy from sunshine and wind, tides, waves, currents, or from the temperature differential between warm surface and deep ocean water.  In comparison, these seem risk-free.  I, for one, am willing to take the chance.

_____________________

Photo shows explorer, environmentalist and educator Jean-Michel Cousteau of France watching fish in an exhibit at the Sydney Aquarium Nov. 17, 2006. REUTERS/Will Burgess

The ongoing struggle in the Gulf of Mexico to contain and remove oil spilling from a ruptured deepwater well is damaging more than the environment, a bi-weekly analysis of companies in the news by ASSET4 data providers shows.

Here is a breakdown of the companies that made headlines Apr. 23 to May 7 for making or losing credibility based on environment-related activity.

Company selections were made by Christopher Greenwald, director of data content at ASSET4, a Thomson Reuters business that provides investment research on the environmental, social and governance performance of major global corporations. These ratings are not recommendations to buy or sell.

Here are the recent hits and misses:

BP PLC

In what has the potential to become one of the worst environmental disasters in U.S. history, BP has faced increasing scrutiny in the media in the past 2 weeks for its poor history of safety and environmental incidents in the recent past. The company had an oil spill in late 2009 at its Prudhoe Bay operations, the location of a devastating spill in 2005, and the company has recently faced a law suit brought by employees over exposure to toxic chemical releases at its Texas City refinery, the site of an explosion in 2006 that killed 12 workers.

Transocean, Halliburton, Cameron

While attention has focused in the media on BP, other companies are implicated in the Deepwater Horizon incident. Those likely to face significant litigation include Transocean, the owner and operator of the rig; Halliburton, which provided cementing to stabilize the walls of the well and Cameron which produced the rig’s blowout preventers.

Freeport-McMoran

Freeport-McMoran is again facing pressure from institutional shareholders to appoint a board member with environmental expertise.  The resolution for the company’s June 9 annual meeting is being led by Holland’s large pension fund ABP.  A similar proposal received 1/3 of the votes of shareholders last year and is being driven by continued environmental controversies surrounding the company’s mining operations in Papua New Guinea.

Royal Dutch Shell

In the wake of the Deepwater Horizon disaster, Royal Dutch Shell has recently faced renewed criticism for its plans to drill in the Arctic Ocean.  Although exploratory drilling has been granted conditional approval by the U.S. Minerals Management service, environmental and Native American groups are challenging the plans in appeals court, arguing that Shell’s planned drilling would pose a significant threat to the natural habitat of the Arctic region.  This news comes as Shell has also recently revealed that it spilled 14,000 tons of oil in Nigerian during 2009, more than double the amount of the previous year, which the company has blamed on increasing attacks by local militant groups.

Wal-Mart

In one of the largest environmental fines in U.S. history, Wal-Mart reached a $27.6 million settlement with the State of California for improperly disposing of hazardous waste at its stores and distribution centers throughout the state.  The settlement includes a $20 million fine, as well as $6 million to develop better training and processes to safely dispose of toxic waste in the future.

Cisco

Cisco topped the ranking of Greenpeace’s annual Cool IT ranking, which measures companies on their commitment and solutions to fight climate change.  Greenpeace commended Cisco’s greater transparency on the environmental impacts of their products, the company’s “Smart Plant” green products initiative, as well as the policy advocacy efforts on the part of the company and specifically its CEO John Chambers for policies addressing climate change.

_______________________________

Photo shows a British Petroleum (BP) logo at a petrol station in south London April 27, 2010.  REUTERS/Toby Melville