Who is being protected by the EPA?

Who is being protected by the EPA? Although the agency is called the “Environmental Protection Agency,” the political movers and shakers in Washington continue to block its mission. If you doubt my own take on things, check this headline from the December 20th Wall Street Journal: ’EPA Sides With Auto Industry: California Is Blocked From Tightening Caps On Tailpipe Emissions”

According to the article “The Bush administration blocked California's plan to put tighter limits on automobile tailpipe emissions, handing a victory to the auto industry on the same day the president signed an energy bill that mandates the biggest boost in federal fuel-efficiency standards in more than 30 years.” Full text: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119810794061340765.html

The “biggest boost in federal fuel-efficiency standards in more that 30 years.” Well, that’s technically true. But the larger truth is the absurdity of legislation which gives the auto industry twelve more years to create a 10MPG improvement. 35 MPG by 2020? My 2003 Volvo comes close to that. The gutless energy bill taken together with the EPA’s blocking California’s emissions cut plan is a tragic failure of the Federal Government at best, misguided protection of special interests at worst.

In addition to California, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington have already passed tougher emissions rules for cars and Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Minnesota and Utah are about to do so. Just how absurd is it that the EPA will now spent time and resources to battle states who have had the foresight to enact more realistic emissions standards.

The Federal government not only has no coherent policy to address environmental issues, it is a major roadblock to much needed progress. Ironically, in attempting to protect the business as usual auto industry, the administration is failing to provide support for the increasing number of corporations who are facing up to the current situation and developing the technologies of the future. Collectively, these corporations understand that in today’s global economy, if corporate America does not lead in the necessary development and innovation, Americans will be buying these products from elsewhere.

For many months now, the central premise of this writer is that there is no coherent leadership at the Federal level. America needs a comprehensive national policy, which recognizes national security, energy independence, and global warming are closely linked issue. Issues which must be urgently and simultaneously addressed.

The stonewalling of the rest of the world at the recent Bali conference on global warming and the EPAs attack on state environmental protection efforts show the truth to be uglier. Unfortunately, it is not only that there is no recognition in Washington of the urgent need to wisely address the closely linked issues of national security, energy independence, and global warming. Currently, short term political considerations, lack of wise consideration of America’s long term interests, pride, greed and ignorance are driving federal policy. The price that every American will have to pay for this folly grows daily.

Once upon a time an America a new President challenged us all to “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” I pray the next President will present us all with the same challenge – and mean it.

IF ONLY IT WERE A THREE STOOGES MOVIE!!!

If only it were a Three Stooges movie! You could just change the channel. Unfortunately, the cost to every American of the lack of any coherent and coordinated policy to address the potent nexus between energy independence, global warming and nation security on the part of the Federal Government grows daily. Add to that now the financial crisis now facing America, a housing market described earlier this month by Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf as the “worst since Great Depression,” credit losses at major US Banks projected to be over $400 billion and growing daily, and a growing floodtide of foreclosures facing millions of American homeowners. What does it all mean for America? The UN Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change report 11/17/07 – IPCC Fourth Assessment (AR4) Report full report & panel web-cast makes it ever clearer that the problems associated with global warming and the need to address them grow greater with every day’s delay. Sooner or later, America will have to invest large sums of money to address global warming. The longer we wait, the more it will cost.

Another problem we now face is the plunging value of our dollar, as this inevitably will continue to push up the price of oil. The longer American remains dependent on imported oil, the faster we will have to print dollars to pay for it. At some point, it is quite possible - to the delight of Al Queda, Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Iranian President Mahmaud Ahmadinejan - that many countries will follow the lead of Kuwait which this summer stopped pegging its own currency to the dollar http://finance.sympatico.msn.ca/investing/jimjubak/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4948777. Were this to happen, oil prices would truly skyrocket, as America would have to pay for its oil by buying the local currency at the exchange rates set by other, often not very friendly, countries.

There is mega-Katrina policy failure at the federal level. The best policies and iniatives in America are bubbling upward from state and city government, environmentalists, corporate America and growing awareness on the part of the American public. Twenty-five states and the District of Columbia currently require power companies to produce at least some of their electricity from renewable sources.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/environment/2007-08-21-renewable-energy_N.htm General Electric is closing plants which manufacture the old style incandescent bulbs, and its manufacture and sale of CFLs is growing rapidly. http://www.tedmag.com/common/webnewslink.asp?currentpage=4635
Advancements in solar technology are leading to large scale, price competitive solar energy production.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/business2/business2_archive/2007/06/01/100050990/index.htm

Given all that is happening outside the beltway, imagine the progress America could make with a wise, coherent and coordinated national policy to address the potent nexus between energy independence, global warming and nation security. Consider the alternative. It’s easy to laugh at the absurdity of a three Stooges movie. Laughter will be harder to come by in an America where energy must be rationed and available only for essential services. If we collectively fail to make wise choices for America now, we may well collectively suffer as, the lights go out in our homes, and there isn’t enough gas to get to work.

OIL WILL HIT $100 A BARREL AND KEEP GOING UP!

A cartoon in a recent Wall Street Journal showed a gas station with a sign that said “Last $2.75 gas for the next 10 years. $2.75 gas is now gone the way of the 10 cent pay phone call...gone forever. I paid $3.49 per gallon to fill up here in Naples, Florida yesterday. The weakening dollar is strongly related to raising oil prices.

When will oil hit $100 a barrel? This month? Next week? Before the end of the year? Soon. But the more important point is that it won’t stop there – it largely depends on how week the dollar becomes. Pick your date.

Frederic Lasserre, head of commodities research at Société Générale in Paris He suggested $120 a barrel could represent the level at which the cost of oil could result in economic damage that would be on par with the Arab oil embargo in the 1970s. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20071108.ROIL08/TPStory/Business Currently, there is no telling how much higher the price will go: $120? $150? $200?

Earlier this month former U.S. Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin, led a Securing America's Future Energy (SAFE) “Oil ShockWave” exercise in Washington, D.C. The purpose of the exercise was to simulate a global oil supply crisis and explore economic and strategic options for limiting the damage. According to Rubin: "Oil ShockWave demonstrates the critical importance of preventative action in mitigating the risks of oil dependence. Once a major supply crisis occurs, the short-term options are extremely limited.”(My italics)
http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN0155542720071101

The military, strategic and political costs to the United States of failing to have a national policy of preventive action reducing the waste of energy, addressing carbon emissions and bringing on line, as rapidly as possible EVERY source of clean, renewable domestic energy available to us grows daily. National Security, energy independence and global warming are closely linked issues, which must be urgently and simultaneously addressed. To paraphrase Winston Churchill in his calls for England to take seriously the rising threat of Hitler and Nazi Germany…Of course we shall do it in the end, we shall surely do it…but how much more dear the cost for every day’s delay. How much more dear the cost, we don’t know. But the longer we delay addressing these issues, the higher the cost for every American.

Oil heads to $100 a barrel- keep doing the math!

Keep doing the math! Approximately two-thirds of American homes – regardless of income – have coffee makers. Coffee makers, small as they are use more energy than your computer, a radio, a humidified or a mid-sized TV set…typically 900 – 1200 watts. Older ones use more. We have one in our home. I love that first cup of coffee in the morning. But once the coffee is brewed I shut the coffee maker off. It takes a lot of energy to have it on just to keep the coffee warm. When you pour a cup of coffee later in the morning, put it in your microwave for 30 seconds instead. Your microwave typically uses about 1500 watts, but that is only for 30 seconds to heat your coffee. Leaving your coffee maker on hour after hour wastes lots of energy – and often, because the coffee isn’t hot enough, you will end up zapping it in your microwave anyway.

http://cwmi.css.cornell.edu/TrashGoesToSchool/Energy.html

Our relatively new “Mr. Coffee” unit uses only 700 watts. However, if you do a quick search on goggle, you will find that some use up to 1500 watts. Also, you will note that many coffee maker comparison websites do not include a comparison of the energy used.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=coffee+maker%2Bwatts+used&btnG=Search

Doing the math in our home, and switching to cfl lighting has resulted in an approximately one-third reduction in our energy bill.

http://greenhawk.blogspot.com/2007/09/do-math.html

Corporate America continues to grow in the understanding that energy efficiency makes good business sense…going green saves green! Many states have provided leadership in energy conservation, and in those states especially, cooperation with private industry to conserve energy is taking off.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118938179474522033.html

We do not have leadership at the federal level which recognizes that national security, energy independence and global warming are closely linked issues. These are issues which must be urgently and simultaneously addressed. Today’s Wall street Journal has a front page article by Peter Fritsch and Kelly Evans discussing the probability of crude oil prices reaching over $100 per barrel They point out that tight oil supplies and a weak U.S. dollar are both factors which suggest that oil prices have further to rise. The result would be higher energy prices for every US consumer.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119102487310743331.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Meanwhile, I suggest we all “do the math” of our personal use of energy. Using the same amount of energy will continue to cost you more. Switching to more efficient use of energy will lower your personal cost for energy, because you will be using less energy to get the same tasks done. You win. America wins.

DO THE MATH!!!

DO THE MATH! The commonly available nightlight found in America’s bathrooms, bedrooms and kitchens uses a seven watt incandescent bulb. Now there are a number of LED nightlights available which use far less energy. If you compare the two nightlights above, both made by the same company, the LED uses only .3 Watts compared to 7 watts for the familiar incandescent bulb. Using 7 watts rather than .3 watts means using 23.3 times the power to do the same job. Why would you do this??!!

There are uncountable millions of conventional incandescent seven-watt night-lights in use in the United States. However, assuming just one million of these were replaced at the same time, the replacement lights would require 300,000 watts of power instead of 7,000,000 watts.

This year, replacing conventional incandescent lighting in our home has reduced our electric bill by about a third. Our nightlights, the smallest of our incandescent lights, were replaced last. Anyone can save money on their electric bill by switching to cfls and led lights. There is no longer an issue of availability. They are on the shelves at your hardware store, Home Depot and Wal-Mart’s.

Corporate America is rapidly going green. As oil, gas and electricity prices have gone ever upward companies there is a growing awareness that saving energy translates into lower, sometimes dramatically lower costs.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118772418179504367.html


Many American cities are providing leadership in the areas of energy independence and global warming. All yellow taxis in the city of New York will berequired to use hybrid technology and meet new fuel consumption standards by 2012. According to Mayor Bloomberg: "Phased in over the next five years, these new standards will cut carbon emissions from these vehicles by half within a decade."

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2007-05/2007-05-24-voa33.cfm?CFID=184362152&CFTOKEN=87906977

In Washington D.C., a non-profit consortium of leading Washington-area businesses, institutions, government agencies, congregations, and community and environmental organizations called Cool Capital Challenge, is working to bring about an immediate and dramatic reduction in regional greenhouse gas.

http://www.coolcapitalchallenge.org

There is, regrettably, no coherent leadership at the Federal level. America needs a comprehensive national policy, which recognizes national security, energy independence, and global warming are closely linked issue. Issues which must be urgently and simultaneously addressed. America MUST reduce energy consumption, both by reducing the waste of energy and becoming much more energy efficient. America MUST brings on line, as rapidly as possible, EVERY source of clean, renewable domestic energy available to us.

Oil From Heaven

OIL FROM HEAVEN! This past July oil started to flow from the Albertan oil sands in Canada to petrochemical plants and refineries in southeast Texas. From a current national security standpoint, this is indeed “oil from heaven.” Certainly, the security issues of importing oil from Canada are smaller than importing oil from the Middle East and other politically unstable areas. However, it doesn’t do anything for energy independence. According to a July 11th Wall St Journal article: “The rising tide of Canadian crude is subtly changing the political rhetoric in Washington. "Energy independence" is being redefined so that Canadian crude isn't really viewed as an import.”

http://www.polarisinstitute.org/oil_companies_stake_future_on_canada

It IS imported oil. Imported from a country, with which the United States has excellent relations, but imported oil non-the-less. Additionally, as Canada’s own energy needs increase, Americans certainly cannot expect Canadians are going to sit around in the dark in order to meet our energy needs here in the USA.

The clock is ticking on America’s energy crisis, if there is not a significant improvement in energy conservation, and we simply gobble up every barrel of oil we get, our future pain will be all the greater. To continue to use the same or a greater amount of fossil fuel certainly will not reduce our national carbon footprint.


National Security, energy independence and global warming are closely linked issues, which must be urgently and simultaneously addressed. Americans MUST break their addiction to imported oil. We MUST become much more energy efficient. We must bring on line, as rapidly as possible, EVERY source of clean, renewable domestic energy available to us.

There are promising new technologies which could make a big difference. Imagine an “EZ Pass for Emissions" - a tiny device that connects to a car's onboard computer and continuously tracks a vehicle’s emissions in real time. The device exists:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fsb/fsb_archive/2007/07/01/100123042/index.htm

Imagine that in 2006 solar cell manufacturers bought more silicon wafers that the chip industry. That’s just what happened – see the current issue of Forbes magazine.

Imagine that presently the United States has no comprehensive and coherent national policy for urgently and simultaneously meeting the challenges of national security, energy independence and global warming. Unfortunately, we don’t.

We need all ”three cherries” to win the jackpot!



To accompany the GREENHAWK BLOG there is now a GREENHAWK WEB RESOURCES PAGE. The website’s content, which is regularly updated, includes hyperlinks to websites which offer useful information for those for those interested in the potent nexus between national security, energy independence, and America's carbon footprint.

http://www.lifecoachusa.com/greenhawk

To get on the GREENHAWK BLOG has been updated E-list, please E-mail me and include “Add me to the Greenhawk E-List” as your subject. Thank you!

America’s energy crisis: “danger, opportunity.”

America’s energy crisis grows deeper every day. The crisis is becoming very apparent: the United States cannot sustain an energy system that relies on $200,000 per minute of imported oil, nor continue to be the world’s largest carbon footprint. Add to this al queda and its ilk are well aware of our vulnerability. Perhaps we would profit from thinking about the Chinese symbol for crisis, which is is translated as “danger, opportunity.”

In he current crisis, there is indeed both danger great opportunity. Thanks to growing public awareness, things are changing. The Energy Industry Bulletin, of July 29th, 2007 quotes an article by Rebecca Smith, The July 25, 2007 Wall Street : “As recently as May, U.S. power companies had announced intentions to build as many as 150 new generating plants fueled by coal… But as plans for this fleet of new coal-powered plants move forward, an increasing number are being canceled or development slowed. Coal plants have come under fire because coal is a big source of carbon dioxide, the main gas blamed for global warming,…”

http://www.energybulletin.net/32715.html?referer=sphere_related_content

In the August 2nd, 2007 Wall Street Journal, an article by Jonathan Welsh reports: “To win back customers, auto makers are using a variety of new technologies to improve SUVs' fuel economy, including cleaner-burning diesel engines, gasoline-electric hybrids, special lightweight parts and even power-steering pumps that think for themselves.” Corporate America increasingly realizes that Going Green is now part of doing business in the USA, and will become more so.


Others recognize the opportunities which America’s energy crisis brings with it. The same Wall Street Journal issue, in an article by Eleanor Laise, notes there is now “a slew of funds focusing on solar power, wind turbines and other alternative energy sources.” By bringing alternative, clean and renewable domestic energy sources on line as rapidly as possible America will greatly enhance its national security and greatly reduce our carbon footprint. America also has the opportunity to become the world leader in clean, renewable energy technologies.




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

To accompany the GREENHAWK BLOG there is now a GREENHAWK WEB RESOURCES PAGE. The website’s content, which is regularly updated, includes hyperlinks to websites which offer useful information for those for those interested in the potent nexus between national security, energy independence, and America's carbon footprint.

http://www.lifecoachusa.com/greenhawk

To get on the GREENHAWK BLOG has been updated E-list, please E-mail
me and include “Add me to the Greenhawk E-List” as your subject. Thank you!

The United States spends $200,000 per minute on imported oil!

The United States spends $200,000 per minute on imported oil...$13 million per hour.

http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/aoilpolicy2.asp

What's in your wallet? Dollars which are shrinking in value as our debt load increases!

What's in al queda's wallet? Dollars Americans spend on imported oil which are turned into the weapons which kill American servicemen and woman.

National Security, energy independence and global warming are closely linked issues, which must be urgently and simultaneously addressed. Americans MUST break their addiction to imported oil. We MUST become much more energy efficient. We must bring on line, as rapidly as possible, EVERY source of clean, renewable domestic energy available to us. .

The national Intelligence Estimate 7/07 -Infrastructure Targets & Economic Aftershocks

The National Intelligence Estimate for July of 2007 titled The Terrorist Threat to the US Homeland (declassified version) anticipates that attacks on US soil by al-Qa’ida’ are likely “… to focus on prominent political, economic, and infrastructure targets with the goal of producing mass casualties,visually dramatic destruction, significant economic aftershocks, and/or fear among the US population." http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/07/17/nie.terrorist.threat.pdf

A December 2004 al-Qaeda fatwa states:“We call on the mujahideen in the Arabian Peninsula to unify their ranks and target the the oil supplies that do not serve the Islamic nation but the enemies of this nation.” Worldwide, terrorist attacks on oil pipelines are on the increase.

http://www.senate.gov/~foreign/testimony/2006/CopulosTestimony060330.pdf

Domestically, America’s oil refineries are attractive targets for al queda. No new refinery has been built since 1976, and under the best of conditions, our refineries just barely are able to meet demand. The post Katrina jump in gasoline prices made plain the economic implications of damage to our energy infrastructure.

America needs a comprehensive national policy which recognizes that
we MUST bring on line, as rapidly as possible, EVERY source of clean, renewable domestic energy available to us.

To do this, America has to play catch up ball. According to a July 9th, 2007 article in the Wall Street Journal, "The U.S. lags other countries in wind-turbine capacity, and government support has been inconsistent." Across the US, wind-power projects from Virginia to California are stalled because of a lack of parts. In Europe, where wind power has been in use for over two decades, renewable-energy companies anticipated a shortage of turbines and have locked in orders with the makers of wind turbine parts.

http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/alternative-energy-hurt-by-a-windmill/n20070709133009990006

In May of 2000, 18 months before 911, The US Department of Energy release a report which stated: “Oil dependence remains a potentially serious economic and strategic problem for the United States…. Estimates of the costs to the U.S. economy of the oil market upheavals of the last 30 years are in the vicinity of $7 trillion, present value 1998 dollars, about as large as the sum total of payments on the national debt over the same period...These cost estimates do not include military, strategic or political costs associated with U.S. and world dependence on oil imports.”

http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cpr/v823/rpt/107319.pdf

The military, strategic or political costs to the United States of not becoming much more energy efficient and bringing on line, as rapidly as possible, EVERY source of clean, renewable domestic energy available to us are incalculably larger today.

The National Intelligence Estimate for July of 2007

The National Intelligence Estimate for July of 2007 titled The Terrorist Threat to the US Homeland (declassified version) states that the United States currently is in a heightened threat environment…. al-Qa’ida will continue to enhance its capabilities to attack the Homeland…”

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/07/17/nie.terrorist.threat.pdf


Less than 72 hours ago my wife and I were flying home to Naples, Florida following seven days in the Villa Park, California and a wonderful family reunion. On each of those seven days the United States imported approximately 10.181 million barrels of oil per day.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html

Among the many reasons that the threat of terrorist attacks on US soil is increasing daily is that Americans are generously funding the enemy’s war against us with the vast flow of dollars we are spending on imported oil. . America spends more than $200,000 per minute on foreign oil -- $13 million per hour.

http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/aoilpolicy2.asp

A significant portion of those dollars is funneled to al queda, its affiliates, and imitators. Those dollars purchase the bullets, RPGs and components for the IEDs, which result in the death of American servicemen and women daily. Those dollars fund individuals and groups who are hard at work planning attacks on targets on US soil. Our dependence on imported oil makes us vulnerable to efforts by al queda to disrupt our oil supply. Of equal importance is the truth that the more fossil fuel we use, the greater our national impact on global warming.

We MUST reduce our energy consumption, both by reducing the waste of energy and becoming much more energy efficient. We MUST bring on line, as rapidly as possible, EVERY source of clean, renewable domestic energy available to us. National Security, energy independence and global warming are closely linked issues, which must be urgently addressed simultaneously. To paraphrase Winston Churchill in his calls for England to take seriously the rising threat of Hitler and Nazi Germany…Of course we shall do it in the end, we shall surely do it…but how much more dear the cost for every day’s delay.

Flying at 34,000 – post 911

Writing somewhere over Texas, on our way to LA, it is possible to reflect on many things as I sit next to my wife, Linda, and watch the shadow of our 737 on the clouds to the side and a bit below us.

At the Fort Myers airport our IDs were checked, our bags x-rayed and examined and we were both patted down. We are very thankful for the security protocol which tens of thousands experience at America’s airports now. It was undreamed of on September 10th, 2001. When what MUST be done becomes clear, goals can be articulated and what has to be done gets done.

A great deal of our travel experience would have been undreamed of on July 26, 1990 when the Americans With Disabilities Act became the law of the land. Linda has MS. Because her walking is limited, she needs to be brought to the plane in a wheel chair, and then assisted with an aisle chair to her seat. Airlines just didn’t do this prior to the ADA. Now it is routine, and it makes a big difference for people with disabilities. When what MUST be done becomes clear, goals can be articulated and what has to be done gets done.

Like the triple headed hydra of Greek Mythology, America faces three challenges which MUST be addressed simultaneously - national security, dependence on imported oil, and our national carbon footprint. Al Queda is at war with us and works round the clock to cause our grievous harm. Our dependence on imported oil makes us vulnerable to efforts by al queda to disrupt our oil supply. The more fossil fuel we use, the greater our national impact on global warming.

We MUST bring on line, as rapidly as possible, EVERY source of clean, renewable domestic energy available to us. When what MUST be done becomes clear, goals can be articulated and what has to be done gets done.

Critics of Live Earth complain about its carbon footprint http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/live_earths_huge_carbon_footprint/
, but the producers of Live Earth were overall very green savvy. If you are reading this, you have a carbon footprint. Every human being and almost all human activity does. The point is, the consciousness of more and more people is moving in the direction of reducing their own carbon footprint. Off-Grid journalist Brendan Montague clomplains that Live Earth became a “huge PR-driven machine with multi-national companies who have disputable green credentials. ” The reality is that the Corporate World is rapidly going green. Many were not in the past, however, the only place to change anything is now and in the future. Is it helpful to have someone in charge of vetting the “green credentials” of others?


Live Earth was a terrific multi media worldwide 24-hour infomercial on Global Warming and other environmental issues. Over 10 million people logged in and watched it on the web. One of the recommendations repeated many times on Live Earth is switching to CFLs. In our home, we replaced conventional 60-watt light bulbs with 14 watt CFLs. We get the same amount of light. We have not only significantly reduced our energy use and carbon footprint, we have cut our electricity bill by a third. Saving money while reducing energy used and reducing our environmental impact is SMART GREEN! It is very likely that sales of CFLs will increase as a result of Live Earth. That is a good thing, for the Earth, and for America. CFLs are much better than the older incandescent light bulbs. Not perfect http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/070518-cfls-bulbs.html
but much more environmentally friendly. It seems very likely that LEDs may improve to the point where they replace CFLs, and that would be even better. “The perfect is the enemy of the good!” Right now replacing incandescent light bulbs with CFLs will, if it becomes widely practiced, have a large positive global impact. Live Earth may well contribute to the rapidly growing trend of switching to CFLs and gave us some great music too. Well done Live Earth!

The vulnerability of the United States to oil supply disruption

”Linking Al-Qaeda to this issue is ridiculous on its surface. It's the tactic of someone without much else to go on.” – Tom Chandler, comment on “Dam and more dam” blog by Greenhawk on 07/05/07.

Is it a ridiculous linkage? If you ask people in London, who are observing the second anniversary of the subway bombings in London, and who were, in recent days, once again targets, along with the people of Glasgow, you might find many would understand well this linkage. So too the people of Madrid and New York City.

The United States consumes approximately one quarter of the world’s oil
http://www.nationmaster.com/red/pie/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption
According to April 2007 US Government statistics, the top 5 countries from which we import oil were Canada (1.909 million barrels per day), Mexico (1.460 million barrels per day), Saudi Arabia (1.458 million barrels per day), Venezuela (1.182 million barrels per day), and Nigeria (0.891 million barrels per day).
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
Certainly, there is a possibility of disruption of oil supplies from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Nigeria. Even as I write this, three year old Margaret Hill, daughter of a British oil worker in Nigeria, has been the latest kidnap victim of groups targeting Nigerian oil production.

In 2002, 62% of the oil used in the United States was imported. The vulnerability of the United States to oil supply disruption is recognized by the US Department of Energy http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/printable_versions/national_energy_security.html#supply.

Al Qaeda is at war with America, and indeed the entire Western World. Their ranks include people who are as educated and intelligent as we are. We are a nation that is dependent on imported oil. It makes us vulnerable to economic disruption. They are as aware of our vulnerability as anyone else, and they will certainly try to exploit our vulnerability.

Bringing on line, as rapidly as possible, clean, renewable domestic energy, including hydroelectric power, should be a national priority from the standpoint of national security, and it makes great environmental sense too. It would substantially reduce our national carbon footprint. Based on the above, it would be unwise to decommission any dam which is currently generating electric power. Indeed, we should build more.

Dam and dam more

In an article in the May 30th, 2007 Wall Street Journal entitled "Dam the Salmon" discussing the opposition of some environmentalists to the Klamath hydroelectric dams in the Pacific Northwest, writer Shikha Dalma notes: "These dams provide cheap, renewable energy to 70,000 homes in Oregon and California. Replacing this energy with natural gas -- the cleanest fossil-fuel source -- would still pump 473,000 tons of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year. This is roughly equal to the annual emissions of 102,000 cars."

But perhaps the most important point made in this article is that "Large hydro dams supply about 20% of California's power (and 10% of America's)." (Bold italics mine). http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110010142

The Environmental Protection Agency recognizes hydroelectric dams as a clean, renewable energy source http://www.epa.gov/cleanrgy/hydro.htm

Some, not all, environments oppose dams and wish, for a variety of reasons to restore rivers to their "natural flow." Check out this blog: http://battlefortheklamath.blogspot.com/search/label/klamath The blog's writer says "PacifiCorp, part of Warren Buffet's financial empire, is willing to spend the estimated $300 million it will take to build the fish ladders needed for salmon to get on the other side of the four dams on the Klamath River instead of taking out the dams and restoring the river to its historic flows. Some studies show taking out the dams would cost less than building the fish ladders. PacifiCorp is not ruling out breaching the dams, but this is still a blow to those (including me) that hoped the high cost of the fish ladder system would cause PacifiCorp to tear down the dams for financial, if not environmental, reasons."

For many environmentalists, a major issue has been the impact of dams on salmon and other river marine life. Yet, PacifiCorp is willing to spend the money to build the fish ladders and in other ways modify the dams to protect salmon and other river marine life.

My basic premise is that National Security, energy independence and global warming are closely linked issues, which must be urgently addressed simultaneously. Public policy should reflect this.

Al-Qaeda, its affiliates and imitators, would be delighted to see hydroelectric dams, a domestic source of non-fossil fueled, clean, renewable energy removed. America can’t afford to decommission dams. We should be building more - and, they should be designed with fish ladders and other technology to address environmental issues. Its not that a hydroelectric dam has no impact on the environment, but we are certainly capable to building hydroelectric plants which have much less impact on the environment that we did in the past as well as environmentally upgrading existing hydroelectric dams.

Every kilowatt of energy produced by non-carbon emitting. renewable energy in America lessens our national carbon footprint, and weans us off Middle East oil.

The Issue of the Red Greens

As I write this evening, The first story on BBC news is the story of the Islamic Extremists who planted car bombs in London and Glasgow. The second is of Islamic extremists in a firefight with Pakistani authorities at the Red Mosque in Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan. Kids with weapons dying because of the manipulation and deceit of adult
Islamic extremists.

The current state of global violence and instability is being fueled by an ideological movement of Islamic Extremists and is every bit as dangerous as the ideology of Nazism and Communism.

Every American is a potential target of Islamic Terrorists. Yet, day after day, we run our automobiles, factories and homes on energy largely derived from imported oil. Much of it from the Middle East. The danger to the security of of United States inported oil presents is enormous. And at the same time, the more fossil fuel we burn, the greater our contribution to Global Warming.

You would think that the nexus between national security and environmental issues would have brought people interested in either issues together a long time ago. One reason it has not is very well articulated by Rich Karlgaard in June of 2007 in Forbes Magazine. In many ways there are two very different green movements. The Red Greens see the ending of capitalism as necessary for solving contemporary environmental problems. It is very difficult for enviornmentalists of this ilk to work with Corporate America. Forbes Rich Karlgaard notes that "It's hard to find a major CEO today who isn't talking Green." His advise to CEOs who are skeptical about Global Warming is "zip your lip and go Green anyway...it's the smart, economical thing to do." Kirlgaard's basic premise is that "Going Green makes sense, dollarwise and healthwise." Corproate America is going green. Meanwhile, many Red Greens are upset because they are not doing it for "the right reason."


Hats off to the Environmental movement for bringing consciousness of environmental issues mainstream. In the present circumstances, it is urgent for both environmental and national security purposes that we break our addiction to foreign oil. In many ways today, however, it is not the environmental movement which is leading the way - its American business. Why? For some, certainly not all, in the environmental movement, it is very distasteful and unacceptable to think that American business will be a major player in the making the changes America must make. Even more unsettling to these folks is that Corporate America will make a profit in the process. Corporate America isn't the problem. Al-Qaeda and American complacency is the problem. If you dislike Corporate America so much that you'd rather continue the status quo than see Corporate America be a big part of the solution - Osama bin Laden loves you!

For too long national security and environmental priorities have been seen to be in conflict.

The implications of the attacks on New York City and Washington DC on September 11th, 2001 appear "off the radar" for many Americans. Many have forgotten or are unaware of the February 23rd, 1998 fatwa of Osama Bin Laden, et al, which reads in part…”On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it….” Our nation has mortal enemies who will use any means possible to do us harm, and if possible, destroy us. Our continued dependence on imported oil makes the United States extraordinarily vulnerable to economic disruption. This fact is not lost on those who wish to harm the United States. The growing instability of the Middle East and Nigeria and hostile regimes in countries like Iran and Venezuela, and current events in Bolivia and elsewhere provide prime opportunities for our enemies to systematically exploit our vulnerability.

Decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels is equally necessary for environmental reasons. For too long national security and environmental priorities have been seen to be in conflict. Our national security needs require that the United States exploit every available avenue toward Energy Independence and address the issue of global warming. Specifically, we must:

Bring renewable energy sources on line as rapidly as possible
Bringing renewable energy sources on line as rapidly as possible will require: (a) policies which provide tax and other financial incentives for the building and use of renewable energy sources, (b) policies which provide tax and other financial disincentives for the use of fossil fuel for power generation (as has been done by the state of California with January, 2006, approval of the California Solar Initiative (CSI), a comprehensive $2.8 billion program that provides incentives toward solar development over 11 years.), (c) a review of environmental regulations and programs such that, policies which are counter to bringing on line renewable energy sources as rapidly as possible, e.g., the decommissioning of dams which provide hydroelectric power and obstacles to building additional hydroelectric power generation, are eliminated, (d) a recognition that there is no one “silver bullet” which will provide energy independence for the United States. A variety of existent technologies, upgrades and refinements of existent technologies, nascent technologies and yet-to-be-developed technologies will all play an important role. The appropriate technology(s) for different regions of the country will have to be developed and implemented. For example, here in Florida, solar power will probably play a key role in our future power generation, while this would probably not be true in the Northeast.

Significantly and continually upgrade the emissions and fuel economy standards on all vehicles sold in the United States

These are necessary steps, which will provide one of the basic necessary national responses to global warming and reduce our dependence on imported oil. Whenever we have legislated more stringent standards, the marketplace has responded with more fuel-efficient and less-polluting vehicles.

In today's world, America can't ignore al queda or global warming. That's why I am now a "Green Hawk."

I discover I am a Green Hawk

I am a 64 year 0ld American, who in the post 911 world has come to believe that National Security and Environmental issues such as energy independence and global warming are the Paramount issues facing our country, In the words of the New York times columnist, Thomas Friedman, I am a "Green Hawk." Read his article http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/magazine/15green.t.html?ex=1334289600&en=77253fd58f161a95&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all&pagewanted=all

It has been the case for the past several years that if I find myself in a conversation with several liberals and conservatives, I can manage to drive them all nuts because my best judgement on an issue is not automatically liberal or conservative. My opinion will depend on the issue under discussion.

I care that the United States be able to defend itself. We certainly don't want to become someone Else's province. Similarly, whatever foot dragging and denial we have had on environmental issues, our environment would be raped if we were someone Else's province.

My basic premise is that National Security, energy independence and global warming

My basic premise is that National Security, energy independence and global warming are closely linked issues, which must be urgently addressed simultaneously. Public policy should reflect this.

NATIONAL SECURITY & ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

My country has enemies who use every weapon at their disposal from suicide bombers and flying airplanes into buildings killing thousands of innocent people, to attacks on oil workers, shipping, etc, around the world.

My country needs to decrease its dependence on Middle East oil and bring alternative, clean and renewable domestic energy sources on line as rapidly as possible.

My country needs to work with other nations around the world to address global warming.

My country needs to address all of these issues immediately, simultaneously, and tenaciously.

This is why I blog!

Dr. Sparks Lunney
Naples, Florida USA