The Overbrook Foundation

REDD Controversial Among Indigenous Groups

2009-12-18T16:10:00.002-05:00

Hailed by some as the one solid triumph likely to come out of Copenhagen, REDD, the Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation plan, is garnering the ire of indigenous activist groups and environmentalists.

According to an article in Investigate West, opponents are calling REDD "a new form of colonialism," in which large corporations from developed countries could buy and sell indigenous lands as commodities, getting richer off of far-away lands "preserved" in exchange for unmitigated carbon emissions at home. There is no provision to ensure forests are maintained in their natural state, giving companies carbon offset credits for planting anything -- even a monoculture tree plantation in place of a mature, thriving ecosystem.

In Uruguay, for example, activists complained of a Pacific Northwest timber company that planted acres of pine and eucalyptus in an indigenous plains area. The natural ecosystem was not suited for forest, and indigenous people who were no longer able to survive in their native landscape were forced to move to towns and cities.

Activists are hoping their concerns about REDD and cap and trade will be heard and addressed. In the meantime, negotiations appear to be moving forward, and the agreement has generally been met with optimism.

Click here for a REDD cost and emissions reduction analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Click here for Brazil's answer to REDD: adding a provision so developed countries can only offset a small portion of their emissions through the program.

Click here for a Science Daily article that explores both sides of the REDD issue.

Victory for Low-Power FM Radio

2009-12-17T13:12:00.000-05:00

Yesterday the House of Representatives passed the Local Community Radio Act (S. 592), which was sponsored by Sens. Maria Cantwell and John McCain. Its next hurdle will be facing the Senate. If it passes the Senate, the bill would allow for the creation of hundreds of new, low power FM radio stations dedicate to broadcasting community news and local perspectives to neighborhoods throughout the country. A full-Senate vote has yet to be scheduled, but it would represent the final step for the expansion of low power FM radio to become law. The passing of the bill in the House is a significant victory by media activists groups who have worked hard over the last few years to reach this point.

But, we’re not there yet. If you want to tell your senators to act now and support local radio, click here to sign the petition.

Of course, low-power FM radio isn’t the only battle the media reform movement is facing. Those in the movement are working particularly hard to ensure continued network neutrality. If you’re interested in learning more about network neutrality, specifically, in finding out where your House member stands on the issue, check out this new online tool, which allows you to map lawmakers’ views by state via a database searchable zip code.

As a reminder, network neutrality’s aim is to “preserve an Internet in which service providers cannot offer varying levels of quality depending on such variables as whether a content provider pays to be placed in a higher service tier.” There’s nothing more crucial to ensuring the continued access of information in the 21st century than this issue.

Forests Get Attention at Copenhagen

2009-12-16T15:31:00.003-05:00

With only two more days left in the COP15 schedule, participants, protesters and observers from all over the globe are worried that nothing substantive will be decided. Yvo De Boer arrived at the talks yesterday with a life-preserver in tow, sending a stark signal to those who still may not get it: we are in a state of emergency, and something has to change.

One piece of good news and possible consensus is the agreement on REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation.) Under this program, countries would be compensated for preserving natural landscapes that, if not preserved, would result in even more emissions. Rainforest destruction is now estimated to account for about 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, and peat bogs also act as large carbon sinks. The idea is that poor countries would be paid for preserving these carbon-holding landscapes, and more developed countries could gain carbon credits. (For example, a factory in the U.S. could earn the right to more emissions by investing in land preservation programs overseas.)

Some issues have yet to be resolved, like agreement on what exactly constitutes a "forest," and what exactly defines the land rights of indigenous people. Concern has also been voiced that oceans, which store vast amounts of carbon and are approaching dangerous levels of acidification, are exempt from the plan. But for now, REDD seems like a likely triumph in an otherwise inconclusive meeting.

The Environmental Grantmakers Association held a conference call today, live from Copenhagen. On the call, there was consensus that REDD is one of the quickest, easiest, and least expensive ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If passed as expected, REDD would mark a step forward from Kyoto, (which the United States under the Bush administration infamously refused to sign.) The focus under Kyoto was emissions reduction, with no compensation given for preserving landscapes that naturally store carbon.

Shaun Paul, Executive Director of the EcoLogic Development Fund, participated in the call. Paul said because of governmental resistance to broad environmental legislation, now is the time to prove, through pilot projects, that sustainability works. Paul emphasized that small grants and philanthropy are particularly important and influential now, and through the projects they make possible could be the last push governments need to feel secure in signing climate legislation.

Sarah Christiansen of the Solidago Foundation, another participant on the call, said one positive outcome of Copenhagen has been the tremendous outpouring of grassroots support. Christiansen said that despite media attention to violent protest, overall protesters have been peaceful, and grassroots activists from all economic and cultural backgrounds have bonded over a common cause.

Rachel Leon of EGA called COP15 an "unprecedented event."

If nothing concrete aside from REDD comes out of Copenhagen, at least we can say that voices were heard, frustrations released and connections made for future work. The problem is, our window of future opportunity grows smaller by the minute.

Department of State Creates a New Website for Human Rights

2009-12-16T09:18:00.001-05:00

In an important step for domestic human rights yesterday the Department of State created a new website in connection with its participation in the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review process. This process involves a review of the human rights records of each of the 192 UN Member States once every four years. The United States own human rights record will be reviewed in December of next year based on a report that the government will submit, as well as input from various civil society organizations.

To check out the website created, click here. An important feature of the new website will be a standard “inbox” in which ideas, comments and analysis from civil society on issues relating to human rights can be sent. They are also committed to an outreach process to engage with organizations, including not-profits, citizens groups and grassroots organizations.

The Department of State hopes that “this website will facilitate communication between civil society and the United States government before, during, and after the preparation of the U.S. report to the UN Human Rights Council.”

The creation of this website shows signs of a real dedication around the issues of human rights both here at home in the United States and abroad. It also is promising that they are engaging the communities that are involved in this issue and inviting them to be a part of the process. Let’s hope that it remains as transparent a process as possible, and that it is only the first of many steps in creating a framework of a domestic human rights agenda.

Urban Agenda presents the Green-Collar Jobs Roadmap

2009-12-15T12:29:00.005-05:00

Urban Agenda and the Center for American Progress presented their New York City Green Collar Jobs Roadmap this morning at Philanthropy New York, facilitating a discussion between grantmakers, educators, and representatives from community groups and NGOs.

The Roadmap is the product of the Green-Collar Jobs Roundtable, an advisory board of over 170 organizations, including labor unions, job training programs and businesses. Led by Urban Agenda, the Roundtable compiled data on the current status of green jobs in New York City, and used that data to develop over 30 recommendations for an efficient path into a greener economy. Joanne Derwin, co-founder and executive director of Urban Agenda, explained that a main goal of the Roundtable, and the resulting Roadmap, is to implement real change without just adding another study to a shelf.

J. Mijin Cha, Director of Campaign Research, led the meeting with Derwin and emphasized an important new distinction in the green jobs discussion: green jobs are no longer just jobs that have something to do with environmental sustainability. From now on, green jobs must also be good jobs -- with standards such as benefits, occupational safety and health, opportunity for training and growth, and the inclusion of marginalized communities held as imperatives for the green collar economy to succeed. According to the Roundtable, from now on environmental sustainability includes human sustainability.

So where does the Roadmap go from here? One important step is to make sure Plan 2030, New York City's plan to reduce emissions 30 percent by 2030, uses green job creation as a marker of success. Another step is to include environmental education into the New York City public school systems. A final and essential goal is to shift the thinking of labor unions, businesses and the workforce in such a way that green-collar jobs and sustainability are viewed as essential components of economic development, and necessary steps to pulling the city out of recession.

Click here for an article on the environment/economy link in Social Europe Journal.

Click here for the full New York City Green Collar Jobs Roadmap.

Houston Elects Gay Mayor

2009-12-15T10:27:00.003-05:00

Over the weekend, Houston, TX became the largest city to elect an openly gay mayor as city controller. Annise Parker, an open lesbian, claimed a solid victory over her rival; Parker had 53 per cent of the vote and her opponent Gene Locke (who is also a Democrat) had 47 per cent. Hardly surprising, throughout her campaign she enjoyed the support of gay and lesbian political organizations nationwide. Parker has worked in Houston as a city administrator for the past 1 years, both on the city council and as city controller. Parker will take office in January 2010; she will replace Bill White who could not run because of term limits.

This is not just a victory for gay rights, but also for women's rights as well. Her election also made her the second woman to become mayor of Houston. It will interesting to see what affect her election will have on the issue of gay rights in the state. A few years ago, Houston rejected a referendum to offer benefits to same-sex partners of city workers. Also, in the state of Texas, gay marriage is against the law.

Smaller cities in the United States, such as Portland, Oregon, Providence, Rhode Island, and Cambridge Massachusetts also have openly gay mayors.

Congratulations to Parker for becoming the first openly gay woman to be mayor of a major American city!

New Jersey and DC on Gay Marriage

2009-12-09T10:04:00.001-05:00

We followed the civil marriage debate in last week’s New York State Senate pretty closely. And obviously we were disappointed by the outcome. However, there may be a chance for New Jersey to take an important step forward on this issue later this week. A bill that would allow same-sex marriages in the state appears to be headed to its state Senate for a vote on Thursday after it was released by a committee on Monday morning. It was narrowly approved (7-6) after over eight hours of debate and testimony.

The bill includes an amendment to clarify that religious organizations would not be forced to sanction or participate in a marriage that they “disagreed with.”

It’s unclear whether or not this bill will pass in the Senate tomorrow. It has serious opponents that are organizing to block the measure. For example, The New Jersey Catholic Conference recently delivered more than 150,000 signatures asking legislators to enforce civil union law instead of approving a same-sex marriage bill.

It would be great if New Jersey passes the bill tomorrow, especially after the two significant setbacks of New York last week and Maine earlier this fall. If it does in fact pass, it would join five other states that allow gay couples to wed. Advocates hope to pass the bill in the legislature so Governor Jon Corzine (who supports the bill) can sign it into law before he leaves office next month. The timing is crucial because Republic Chris Christie, who defeated Corzine and will take over as Governor said that he would veto any gay marriage legislation.

There is also some other good news to report out of Washington D.C. Its city council voted 11-2 earlier this month to approve the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act of 2009. The United States Congress will have 30 days to take action on the act. Congress can choose to either vote on the bill, or they can choose to let it go into law as it is. If they decide not to act then same sex couples would be allowed to marry in Washington D.C.

New York Senate Rejects Same-Sex Marriage

2009-12-03T13:10:00.002-05:00

For some time here in New York, gay rights advocates and their supporters have been pushing lawmakers to take up the gay marriage question. While our state already recognizes same-sex marriages that have been performed in other states, it does not currently allow same-sex marriage at home. So it was an extremely disappointing decision yesterday when the New York State Senate rejected the Marriage Equality Bill (S4401) by a vote of 38 to 24. Although New York Governor David Paterson supported the bill, and the state Assembly had already passed it, it clearly didn’t have enough support to pass the marriage law. Not surprisingly, not one Republic voted “Yes” for the bill, and several democrats voted against it. For a full list of how the Senate voted, click here.

Same sex couples can legally marry in five states, four of them in the northeast. Now that New York has unfortunately missed this opportunity, we’ll be keeping our eye on New Jersey, where the legislature is expected to vote on gay marriage in the next month or so. Yesterday, over two hundred New Jersey democrats, including lawmakers, lobbyists and activists, issued a letter calling for the gay marriage vote. It’ll be close; a recent poll showed that voters there support legalizing same-sex marriage by a mere four point margin. Unfortunately newly-elected Republic Governor Chris Christie said he would veto any such bill.

It’s obviously disheartening that our state missed this opportunity to take a stand for equality and put an end to gender discrimination. It’s tough to deal with set backs like yesterdays, and like the ones recently in California and Maine, but those working in the equality movement will continue to persevere. The fight is just beginning.

Copenhagen Predictions

2009-12-02T11:44:00.002-05:00

Predicting the outcome of next week's UN climate summit at Copenhagen is almost as difficult as predicting global warming trends decades down the line. Things are looking up, though, as more world leaders than originally expected are committing to attend the conference. Ninety-eight of 192 UN member nations will send representatives to the conference, up from an expected 65 only one month ago.

The Independent published a "Copenhagen summit at a glance" today, listing the main goals and topics of discussion. A few highlights include:

1) The Copenhagen agreement, a follow-up to the Kyoto Protocol ending on the last day of 2012, will attempt to hold global temperatures at 2 degrees Celcius above the pre-industrial level. Developed countries will be urged to cut their emissions by 80 percent of 1990 levels by 2050.

2) It is expected that developing countries will not be held to such a strict standard, but will be required to show they are moving away from "business as usual" and are taking measures to grow their economies responsibly.

3) The new agreement is also expected to include provisions to halt deforestation.

It remains to be seen if these and a host of additional recommendations will be accepted by the global community. Scientists warn that meaningful policy changes to hold temperatures at or below the 2 degree rise are imperative, and any agreement resulting in less will be disastrous to human society. At the same time, constituents who have the power to influence policy have thus far been apathetic.

Perhaps because global warming progresses slowly and is not immediately apparent, people fail to see it as an imminent and prominent threat. But this lack of appreciation seems to be changing, if slowly. We don't know what the political outcome of Copenhagen will be, but if nothing else it is bringing renewed prominence to the issue.

Click to see a new art exhibition at the Royal Academy in London, showcasing thirty international artists' responses to global climate change.

Fighting Homophobia One Country at a Time

2009-11-25T10:04:00.002-05:00

Stephen Lewis is a former Canadian legislator, former Ambassador to the United Nations, former UN Special Envoy on HIV/AIDS in Africa and a life long activist for social justice. Unlike most current and former politicos, Stephen is genuinely passionate about injustice. On Tuesday, he spoke before the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting made up of the leaders from the 53 Commonwealth nations about the developing travesty of government sponsored homophobia in Uganda. (This was an important venue for this speech as 40 of its members still criminalize same-sex conduct.) His entire speech is devoted to railing against Uganda for the introduction of the Anti-Homosexual Bill - perhaps the most horrendous piece of legislation proposed in the modern era. It can--and should--be read in its entirety. http://ow.ly/Fzf0

Dreaming of a Green Thanksgiving

2009-11-24T10:02:00.001-05:00

Holidays have long been a time of over-consumption -- of gifts we don't really want, food we don't really need, and the extra gasoline we pump to reach our destinations. But holidays can also be a time to relax, reflect, and reset for the year to come. And for those of us following the progress of the climate bill and the promises of world leaders preparing for Copenhagen, this year's season has a slightly greener focus.

Scores of online advice columns are looking at ways to "Green Thanksgiving," offering easy tips such as recycling, using cloth napkins and reusable left-over containers, and starting compost heaps for extra food scraps. One article from Slate gives advice on how to choose a turkey with the smallest carbon footprint. Another from About.com gives revelers ideas on starting a new tradition of eco-friendly Thanksgiving, not just this year but in every year to come.

This new-ish mainstream greening of tradition comes not a moment too soon. One article from the Wonk Room warns, "Global Boiling Declares War on Thanksgiving." Treeehugger lists similar articles discussing this year's shortage of Libby's canned pumpkin, due to unseasonably torrential rains in Illinois that prevented the harvest of large portions of this year's pumpkin crop.

At the same time, researchers at the Mauna Loa government observatory measured atmospheric CO2 in concentrations of 385 ppm this fall, pointing to a steady increase of greenhouse gas accumulation in line with the 2001 IPCC report's worst-case-scenario climate model. At this rate, one researcher observed, CO2 concentrations will reach 450 ppm by 2040, spiking global temperatures by up to 6.5 degrees Celsius by the end of the century.

Dwindling grocery stocks of Libby's canned pumpkin are the least of the changes and hardship we will face. But this is still a time of family and gratitude, after all, and nothing kills the Thanksgiving mood like bringing up drought and famine. Perhaps the best course this season is to give thanks not only for what we have, but what we know -- and how we can use our knowledge to affect positive environmental change.

The Women's Media Center on Saturday's Health Care Vote

2009-11-23T10:19:00.001-05:00

One of the great things about The Women’s Media Center (a non-profit organization founded by Jane Fonda, Gloria Steinem, and Robin Morgan, dedicated to making women visible and powerful in the media) is the unique content they produce on issues crucial to women’s health. This morning they sent around a great article by Peggy Simpson, titled “Health Care Reform: Pro-choice Forces Win the First Round in the Senate.”

In the piece, Simpson discusses the historical impact of Saturday’s vote, but, one of the real victories is for the feminist community. She writes, “[f]or the feminist community, as well as the anti-abortion lobby, the vote also meant that the Senate bill would not contain the House-passed Stupak amendment, which would vastly extend the 1976 Hyde amendment banning federal funds for abortion.” Simpson also discusses the challenges that lay ahead.

To read the piece in its entirety, click here.

Peggy Simpson worked 17 years for the Associated Press, in Texas and Washington, D.C.; covered economics and politics for the Hearst Newspapers, served as Washington bureau chief for Ms. Magazine and reported on Eastern Europe’s transition from communism to a Democratic market economy, as a freelancer during the 1990s. She has also taught at Indiana University, George Washington University and at the American Studies Center at Warsaw University. She currently is a freelancer writer in Washington.

Multiple Factors Imperil Oceans

2009-11-19T14:02:00.008-05:00

A new study published in Nature finds the oceans' capacity to store CO2 is diminishing, even as global emissions show no sign of significant reduction. This news has grave implications for the earth's atmosphere, which has been sharing an anthropogenic carbon burden with the oceans since the Industrial Revolution.

The study's research team, led by Dr. Saman Khatiwala of Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and the Georgia Institute of Technology, found the oceans' rate of uptake for CO2 began slowing in the 1980s and decreased by 10 percent between 2000 and 2007. As the water becomes more acidic, it loses its capacity to act as a carbon sink, shutting the door to emissions that are left to the atmosphere.

In addition to atmospheric effects, an article in the Boston Phoenix connects ocean acidification to a frightening and burgeoning loss of ocean life. Brian Skerry, an underwater photojournalist profiled for the article, describes changes he's seen in ocean life throughout his long career. Areas once thick with life are now dead zones, depleted by overfishing, bottom trawling, acidification and rising water temperatures.

Using the near extinct bluefin tuna as an example, Skerry says, "These are animals that cavemen painted on their walls, that Plato wrote about, wondering about their travels through the Earth's oceans. Yet we're wiping them out."

Daniel Pauly's September New Republic article, Aquacalypse Now, warns, "eating a tuna roll in a sushi restaurant should be considered no more environmentally benign than driving a Hummer or harpooning a manatee. In the past 50 years, we have reduced the populations of large commercial fish, such as bluefin tuna, cod and other favorites, by a staggering 90 percent."

Accelerated commercial fishing methods are one reason for the depletion of ocean life. New methods include GPS fish finders, radar, sonar technology and automated trawlers. An ocean that once teemed with life simply cannot compete with the appetites of the walking world.

In addition to overfishing, acidification caused by CO2 leads to a decrease in the carbonate ions crucial to the development of mollusks, shellfish and coral reefs. Warming adds another challenge to the mix -- the melting Greenland ice sheet adds a freshwater layer to the Atlantic, preventing the overturning of nutrients that spur the growth of plankton.

Although the news is sobering, Daniel Pauly ends his story on an empowering note. There's no need to end fishing, or to expect an end to fish. What we must do, says Pauly, is demand our political representatives put a stop to the "fishing industrial complex." The Nature study gives us another option. Regulating emissions and supporting climate change legislation is one more way to restore our oceans.

The Struggle for Civil Marriage for Same Sex Couples

2009-11-11T10:23:00.002-05:00

As we await the New York Senate's action on the bill to provide civil marriage to same sex couples, we need to remind ourselves of the journey we've been on. The struggle to win rights and protections for same sex couples has been a rollercoaster of wins and losses, including on November 3rd the most recent defeat in Maine and the most recent victory in Washington (where voters upheld the Washington law passed earlier expanding legal protections for domestic partners to include all rights and protections held by married couples, with the exception of the word “marriage”). While there have been many setbacks along the way, the trajectory is strongly positive. In 2000, for example, no state extended the freedom to marry to same sex couples and only two – with 0.6% of the U.S. population – offered any recognition of same sex couples. Today, five states have marriage equality and another ten offer other forms of relationship recognition. These 15 states contain 37% of the U.S. population. The Civil Marriage Collaborative has supported state-based organizations fighting for same-sex marriage rights in every state where advances have been won. If we’ve learned anything along the way it’s that there is no quick and easy way to winning equality. Instead, it is perseverance – particularly when the going is the hardest – that pays huge dividends.

Journalist Detained in Iran

2009-11-11T09:26:00.001-05:00

Yesterday, New America Media announced that correspondent Shane Bauer is among the three Americans who have been detained in Iran since July 31, when they were held on the Iran-Iraq border while hiking in Kurdistan.

According to his website, Shane Bauer is a freelance journalist and photographer based in the Middle East. A fluent speaker of Arabic, his work has largely focused on the Middle East and North Africa, where he has spent much of the past six years. He is a Middle East correspondent for New America Media and his work has been published in the US, UK, Middle East, and Canada including outlets such as the L.A. Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Christian Science Monitor, The Nation, Le Monde Diplomatique (German edition), Slate.com, Aljazeera.net, The San Francisco Bay Guardian, Democracy Now!, E: The Environmental Magazine, and Black Entertainment Television.

Sandy Close the Executive Editor and Director of New America Media/Pacific News Service, issued the following statement yesterday in response to reports from Tehran that Bauer, his girlfriend Sarah Shourd and their close friend Josh Fattal are accused of espionage.“

We are deeply concerned that the Iranian authorities appear to be accusing Shane and his friends of espionage, an allegation that is both disturbing and absurd. We appeal to the Iranian authorities to treat this case for what it is and show compassion and leniency. The simple fact is that three friends went hiking and may have strayed across the Iranian border by mistake. Shane Bauer is a gifted writer and photographer whose regular freelance reporting for NAM from the Middle East has shed much-needed light on events in the Arab world. He had offered to report for us on the elections in Iraqi Kurdistan during his trip to the region, on what was first and foremost a vacation with friends. Our thoughts are with Shane’s family at this difficult time and with the families of Sarah and Josh. We continue to hope that they will be released soon.”

If you would like to show your support for Shane, Josh, and Sarah please join visit www.freethehikers.org

Plastic and Other Garbage Accumulates in Oceans

2009-11-10T10:37:00.004-05:00

A story in today's New York Times warns that scientists estimate five or more vast swaths of trash exist in oceans worldwide. Plastic and other human detritus are pervasive throughout the oceans, but gyres, whirl-pooled areas of swirling water currents, bring the trash together in large, floating bunches. The best known of these toxic gyres is the Pacific Garbage Patch, estimated at twice the size of Texas and floating about 1,000 miles off the coast of California.

Old fishing nets, bottle caps, light bulbs and other garbage fill in the patch, but the plastics that make up the majority of ocean trash are particularly damaging. Plastics take an estimated 1,000 years to decompose in a landfill. When exposed to sun and water in the ocean, they appear to decompose at a much faster rate, but actually just break down into tiny "nurdles" and microscopic particles that fish ingest.

Even more troubling are the toxic chemicals such as DDT and PCBs that plastic readily absorbs. When plankton and small fish swallow tiny plastic bits, they ingest the attached chemicals. Smaller marine animals are in turn eaten by larger ones, and the toxic chemicals pile on up the food chain in a process called bioaccumulation. Journalist Marla Cone's 2006 book Silent Snow describes this process in disturbing detail, as it relates to indigenous people living in the Arctic who subsist on high-food-chain animals such as seal. As the "kings" of the food chain we've become, human beings are at risk of absorbing high levels of toxins accumulated by animals living in polluted environments.

Author Alan Weisman's chapter on nurdles in his 2007 book The World Without Us offers a detailed view of the lifespan of plastic.

The positive side of this sobering news is that awareness breeds action. With the Obama administration taking steps to regulate our treatment of the oceans (see yesterday's post), scientists have a better chance of finding an audience for their discoveries and warnings.

Obama Administration Looks to the Oceans

2009-11-09T11:26:00.002-05:00

A White House task force is recommending a new National Ocean Council, which for the first time will attempt to develop national policy surrounding the United States' use and treatment of oceans, coastlines and lakes. As industry demand for ocean space grows, the new Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force is working to consolidate the 140 laws and 20 federal agencies currently presiding over the nation's use and treatment of our waterways.

Although climate change is perhaps the most prominent environmental issue in the news these days, the state of the oceans takes a close second. Algal blooms caused by fertilizers and other pollutants are killing marine life at alarming rates, as are excessive levels of acidifying CO2. About 22 million tons of CO2 are absorbed by the oceans every day. The Great Pacific Garbage Patch, twice the size of Texas, swirls 1,000 miles off the coast of California. And every eight months, oil in amounts rivaling the Exxon Valdez spill collectively seeps into oceans from runoff on driveways and roads.

Is this a tragedy of the commons, or an opportunity for positive change? Luckily, the Obama Administration is tackling the problem as opportunity, calling for new ideas and regulation related to marine spatial planning. Demand for ocean and coastal space is growing faster than ever. Along with traditional uses such as commercial fishing and shipping, oceans are now being tapped for oil reserves, deepwater wind farms, wave and tidal power. At the same time, commercial interests require oversight to ensure protection of marine life and water quality.

Click here for a detailed read of the White House task force plan.

Al Gore's "Our Choice"

2009-11-04T14:23:00.005-05:00

Al Gore spoke last night before a packed audience at The American Museum of Natural History, continuing the public awareness crusade he began with 2006's An Inconvenient Truth. While his first book (also an Oscar-winning documentary) focused on the problems of climate change, Gore's new book focuses on the tools we have to mitigate and reverse it.

Pacing the stage without notes, Gore spoke calmly and candidly about the state of the global environment and his views on what can be done to secure a cleaner, healthier future for all. "We have all of the tools and all of the solutions for three or four climate crises, and we only have to solve one," Gore said.

At its base, Our Choice is a detailed, step-by-step analysis of alternative energy methods we can use to shrink our dependence on greenhouse-gas emitting fossil fuels. Early chapters break down solar, wind, and geothermal alternatives. Gore also details nuclear and carbon capture and sequestration options, which remain highly controversial.

If he had stopped there, Gore's Our Choice would have served as a detailed textbook for environmental studies classes nationwide. But he ventures beyond dry explanations with chapters echoing his 2007 The Assault on Reason, with titles such as "Changing the Way We Think," and "Political Obstacles." At the Museum, Gore spent a significant portion of his presentation talking not about climate change, but about the amount of television the average American watches each day, and the neurobiological explanations for society's sluggish reactions to alarming news about global warming.

At the beginning of the summer, I blogged about a talk between the New York Times' environment reporter Andrew Revkin and Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. When asked his opinion on the single most influential step individuals can take to mitigate climate change, Pachauri, without skipping a beat, implored the audience to stop eating so much meat. Al Gore, when asked the same question by an audience member at the Museum, had a different answer. Change our laws and policies, Gore said, which we are in a uniquely privileged position to do as citizens of the United States.

Gore remained positive throughout his talk, and despite spiking levels of CO2 and dire predictions of a dreary outcome at Copenhagen, he has hope that continued education and outreach coupled with innovation will solve the climate crisis. We simply cannot, in Gore's words, "give the back of our hand" to our children and future generations. According to Gore, future generations will have one of two questions to ask, looking back at the critical choices we are currently making. They will ask either 1) "What were you thinking?" or 2) "How did you find the moral courage to solve this problem when so many said it was unsolvable?" As in An Inconvenient Truth, Our Choice frames society's response to climate change as a moral issue.

Gore exited the Museum's stage to a standing ovation. Look at Repoweramerica.org for the latest developments in climate change policy and suggestions on what you can do in your community to instigate change.

Maine Voters Reject Same Sex Marriage

2009-11-04T09:54:00.003-05:00

Well, the New York Times called it a "stinging setback for the national gay-rights movement" and they are certainly right.

Yesterday Maine voters narrowly decided to repeal the state’s new law allowing same-sex marriage. Although early returns from the polls showed an extremely close contest, this morning, with 87 percent of precincts reporting, nearly 53 percent of voters had approved the repeal (Question #1 on the ballot), ending what has certainly been an exhaustive and emotional referendum on the national gay-marriage movement. Polls leading up to yesterday's vote had suggested a much closer race.

With this apparent repeal of the same-sex marriage law, Maine will become the 31st state to reject same-sex marriage at the ballot box. Although five other states (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire and Vermont) do have legalized same-sex marriage in their states, in each of these cases, the same-sex marriage laws came through court rulings and legislative action, not through ballot initiatives voted on by citizens.

Sadly, also in New Jersey, Gov. Jon Corzine of New Jersey, who, as we blogged about yesterday, supports gay marriage, lost to Republican Christopher Christie, who strongly opposes it.

While what happened in Maine yesterday is certainly disappointing news, I have no doubt that the gay rights movement will continue to persevere. One of the silver linings from yesterday’s disappointing outcome in Maine is that voter turnout was above average for the state, which typically tends to favor gay marriage. So let us remember that this is not the end of the fight to support same sex couples, it is only the beginning. We are sure that those fighting for gay rights will continue to be energized in this fight.

Gay Marriage on Election Day

2009-11-03T09:29:00.001-05:00

It’s an election day and there are several important issues on the ballots in states across the country, particularly when it comes to gay marriage. Today the state of Maine will vote on gay marriage, and if it wins (e.g. if Question #1 on the state’s ballot is rejected), it would be the first time that voters in the Untied States would approve same-sexy marriage. Public opinion surveys in Maine show a virtual dead head on the Question 1, which would cancel the marriage statute that passed the legislature in may and was signed by Gov. John E. Baldacci (D).

In Washington state, Referendum 71 is asking voters to approve or reject a bill passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor this past spring that would extend to same-sex couples scores of rights currently reserved for married spouses, including ensuring extended work leave for people with critically ill partners and preserving pension benefits for the surviving partner in the event of the other’s death. This week, the Washington Poll, released through the University of Washington, found even stronger support for this law, essentially an “everything but marriage” law, with a 56-39 lead, with 5 percent still undecided.

There are also important races as several states elect governors today. A bit closer to home, in New Jersey, voters will elect a governor, and the Human Rights Campaign has officially endorsed Governor Jon Corzine for reelection based on his strong support for LGBT equality, including his repeated pledges to sign a marriage equality bill that could still be passed by legislators later this year. Likewise Virginia voters will choose a new governor and have a chance to send more fair-minded lawmakers to the state’s House of Delegates in Richmond. Building on Human Rights Campaign’s work in 2007 helping to elect a more fair-minded state senate majority, the organization has endorsed Creigh Deeds for governor.

We will be keeping an eye out on these races, particularly in Maine and in Washington. If you haven’t done so already, make sure to get out and vote in your state today.

President Obama Ends US HIV Travel Ban

2009-11-02T11:23:00.001-05:00

It was a historic moment last week when President Obama announced the end of the discriminatory US HIV Travel Ban.

So what does that mean exactly? Well starting in 2010, people living with HIV will no longer be barred from entering the United States, and they will no longer turned away at borders, no longer forced to hide their condition and interrupt medical treatment.
Here’s a quote from President Obama:

“Twenty-two years ago, in a decision rooted in fear rather than fact, the United States instituted a travel ban on entry into the country for people living with HIV/AIDS. Now, we talk about reducing the stigma of this disease — yet we've treated a visitor living with it as a threat. We lead the world when it comes to helping stem the AIDS pandemic — yet we are one of only a dozen countries that still bar people from HIV from entering our own country. If we want to be the global leader in combating HIV/AIDS, we need to act like it. And that's why, on Monday my administration will publish a final rule that eliminates the travel ban effective just after the New Year.”

The Foundation would like to acknowledge the hard work of Physicians for Human Rights, an organization that mobilizes health professionals to advance health, dignity and justice and promotes the rights to health for all. Physicians for Human Rights has been at the forefront of the movement to end the HIV travel ban. They have helped organize thousands of Americans who wrote moving comments to the Centers for Disease Control, urging them to end the ban.

Their efforts, along with those of everyday Americans who have taken steps to protect the health, dignity and human rights of people living with AIDS worldwide is not something to be understated. This decision is surely an uplift to human rights worldwide. It is, as Physicians for Human Rights wrote in a press release last week, “a monumental policy change.”

American E-Waste Piles Up

2009-10-30T15:05:00.003-04:00

The United States has a lot of catching up to do when it comes to dealing with electronic waste. As reported yesterday in Scientific American, the US is one of the largest producers of e-waste in the world, yet we have no federal regulation in place to monitor toxic chemicals that go into our electronic products, and no federal regulation to monitor where they go when we're done with them.

As of today, 19 states have their own laws for e-waste, but these have little influence over large manufacturers. A patchwork of individually-tailored state laws as opposed to one comprehensive set of guidelines makes it difficult for large manufacturers to comply, and easy for them to turn a blind eye.

A team of researchers at the University of California found that obsolete electronics in US households add up to more than 1.36 million metric tons of potential e-waste. Most of our e-waste is sent out of our own backyards to Africa, China and India, where items are sold second-hand or broken down for their copper and iron components. But without regulation in the manufacturing stages, toxic chemicals from the used electronics leach into the environments where they end up after having been discarded by US consumers.

The Senate introduced a bill in July of 2009 that, if passed, will be the federal government's first step toward monitoring which chemicals are allowable in the manufacture of electronic devices, as well as the ways in which electronics can be legally recycled. But this initial bill focuses on research. Although it is a clear step forward, it is still leagues behind where we could and should be -- working not only on research, but on fully-formed manufacturing, recycling and disposal methods.

While we wait for the government to catch up, there are things we can do as individuals to promote responsible electronics recycling. The Natural Resources Defense Council, an Overbrook Foundation grantee, has been a staunch defender of electronics recycling laws in the city of New York. Search their site for current information on the state of e-waste in NYC. The Council on the Environment of New York City is another great resource, with two e-recycling events happening this weekend in New York.

Wisconsin Passes Producer Responsibility Bill

2009-10-27T09:39:00.000-04:00

There’s good news in the world of sustainable consumption and production! Last week Wisconsin’s Governor Jim Doyle signed into law a new producer responsibility bill for electronics. That makes Wisconsin state the twentieth with such a statewide e-waste law. This bill was sponsored by Senator Mark Miller (D-WI), who was one of the first state legislators to introduce such a bill in the US, nearly eight years ago.

This law that Governor Doyle passed is modeled on the Minnesota producer responsibility law, which calls on manufacturers of computers, TVs and printers to meet collection goals tied to what they are selling. It also includes a ban on use of prison labor and it includes a disposal ban.

This is a significant victory in a lot of ways. While only two states such passed laws this year (Indiana is the other), Wisconsin’s new law is actually a very strong one. According to Barbara Kyle, the National Coordinator at the Electronics TakeBack Coalition, “We’d rather pass fewer laws with teeth, than see states pass weak bills that don’t really mean much. This has collection goals tied to sales, for computer, TV and printer manufacturers. Adding printers into the mix is an important development for meaningful laws.”

This bill also continues a strong show of support for producer responsibility laws. Wisconsin is the fourth state in the Midwest (along with Minnesota, Illinois and Indiana) that have recently passed such laws, which goes a long way in showing that regional momentum definitely helps in getting bills passed.

Additionally, and not surprisingly, Wisconsin’s bill was opposed by manufacturers, who clearly lobbied against it (mostly via their industry associations). A strong coalition of recyclers, local governments, NGOs, schools, and some other businesses were able to overcome these lobbying efforts to get this bill passed. It shouldn’t be understated the amount of time and energy that goes into passing a bill over the objections of a regulated industry.

Let’s hope this momentum from the Midwest carries into other regions. There’s no reason we shouldn’t have effective producer responsibility laws in every state. For a full list of laws by state, be sure to check out this great resource.

Jobs in Navajo Nation...At What Cost?

2009-10-26T11:28:00.004-04:00

Native American communities are still feeling the deleterious effects of decades of uranium mining on their land, even though many mines have been closed since the 1980s. But outcry from Navajo communities over health risks and desecration of sacred lands apparently means nothing to energy companies that are lining up for permits. With the proposed Senate climate bill and upcoming talks in Copenhagen focusing on reducing CO2, many energy industry leaders are placing their bets on nuclear as the "clean and green" power of the future.

But the Navajo Nation knows first-hand that nuclear is far from safe. "This has multi-generational effects," said Early Tulley, Vice President of the Navajo group Dine Citizens Against Ruining Our Environment. "I won't even live long enough to see what it does to people in 500 years." Tulley's wife and daughter have both battled cancers they attribute to radiation contamination on their land.

Since Uranium mining began in the 1940s, The Navajo Nation has been ravaged by kidney disease and cancer, diseases that had previously occurred so rarely among Navajo that words to describe them did not even exist in their native language. Now the Navajo know what cancer is, and they have spent decades petitioning the government to acknowledge its link to uranium mining.

Mining companies counter the horror stories of rampant illness with assurances that today's methods and oversight of mines are much more stringent than they were in the past. In situ leaching, a uranium extraction method in which chemicals dumped into an aquifer leach out uranium, was recently described by an industry executive as perfectly environmentally safe. The water contaminated in the process is purified at the end of the process, but generations of Navajo who have seen their families suffer from poisoned environments will not accept industry assurances blindly.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar instituted a two-year moratorium on awarding new mining claims in New Mexico, but the issue is still up for debate. There is no doubt that opening new uranium mines will add jobs and rejuvenate the economy in the Navajo Nation, but at what cost?

A Victory for Net Neutrality

2009-10-23T09:07:00.001-04:00

We’ve blogged often about the importance of network neutrality. Well there’s been an important and historic development. Yesterday, The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Net Neutrality, which follows through on its earlier promises to preserve an open Internet.

Over 1.6 million people have supported Net Neutrality in the past few years and more than tens of thousands came out in the last week to stand behind the FCC. Yesterday’s vote was an extremely important step forward in securing an open Internet and it was a decisive victory for the public interest and civil rights organizations, small businesses, Internet innovators, political leaders and the public who will all be impacted by this decision.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and Commissioners Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn voted in favor of the rulemaking; Commissioners Meredith Attwell Baker and Robert McDowell gave partial support to the proposal.

The proposed rules would codify the four open Internet principles that now guide the FCC’s oversight and enforcement of communications law. The FCC also proposed rules that would codify two new principles prohibiting Internet service providers from discriminating against content or applications and ensuring that network management practices be transparent.

The FCC is seeking public comment on these proposals, with initial comments due by January 14, 2010 and reply comments due by March 5. Free Press will send an announcement out as soon as you can start filing official comments.

This victory is no doubt in part due to the hard working folks in the media reform movement. Congratulations to them all! Let’s hope this is the first in a series of victories for Network Neutrality.