Media advisory: Press breakfast Wed. March 11 with Sen. Sanders, Greenpeace, and me in DC

***Wednesday, March 11TH, 9:00 am***

Greenpeace Report: How to Solve Global Warming for Half the Cost and Twice the Jobs as Dirty Energy

Blueprint Cuts U.S. Energy Pollution 85% by 2050 without Nuclear Power or Coal

WHAT: On Wednesday, March 11, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Greenpeace and the European Renewable Energy Council will release a report commissioned from the German Aerospace Center (the German equivalent of NASA) that shows how the United States can achieve big reductions in global warming pollution — and do it without nuclear power or coal. The report includes a foreword by Dr. RK Pachauri, chairman of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The report finds that currently available, off-the-shelf clean energy technology can cut U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from current levels by 24% by 2020 and 85% by 2050 — and do it at half the cost and with twice the job creation of what it would take to achieve these reductions with nuclear power and other dangerous energy sources.

The blueprint details the specific technologies and investments necessary to achieve these goals, and includes timetables for their deployment.


  • Senator Bernie Sanders, Chairman, Senate Green Jobs and New Economy Subcommittee
  • Sven Teske, Greenpeace International Renewable Energy Director and co-lead author of the upcoming IPCC special report on renewable energies
  • Dr. Arthouros Zervos, President, European Renewable Energy Council
  • Dr. Joseph Romm, Center for American Progress Senior Fellow and Former Assistant Energy Secretary
  • Steven Biel, Greenpeace U.S. Global Warming Campaign Director

WHEN: Wednesday, March 11, 9 am — 10 am WHERE: Old Ebbitt Grill, Cabinet Room (675 15th St. NW, Washington, DC 20005) RSVP to

A complimentary breakfast buffet will be provided for all media in attendance.

Bloggers are welcome.

9 Responses to Media advisory: Press breakfast Wed. March 11 with Sen. Sanders, Greenpeace, and me in DC

  1. paulm says:

    Is this a ploy by the Germans to take over the world?

  2. paulm says:

    Direct Climate Action Now (DCAN) is here…it them against????

    This is not youthful rebellion. We see the catastrophe ahead
    Climate change has provoked a war between the generations. Younger members of the government need to choose their side

  3. Bill Hewitt says:

    Say It Ain’t So, Joe

    Don’t shoot the messenger: Are you aware of the ad for the Nuclear Energy Institute at this blog? Am I missing something? There’s got to be some missed bit of blog oversight in play.

  4. David B. Benson says:

    Bill Hewitt — Joe Romm ‘splained the advert policy a few eeks ago. It similar to the policy of The Nation, which always manages to tick off a few readers on occasion.

  5. Bill Hewitt says:

    David. Thanks for that. I wasn’t aware of any particular policy, of course, but you will admit that it might come as shock to see the NEI ad immediately below the notice for a press conference that decries nuclear power as “Dirty Energy.” ‘Nuff said.

  6. Bill Woods says:

    “… cut U.S. carbon dioxide emissions … [without] nuclear power and other dangerous energy sources.”

    In what sense is U.S. nuclear power a “dangerous” energy source?

  7. lizardo says:

    a) no long-term solution for spent fuel rods
    b) “recycling” is reprocessing which makes lots of chemical and radioactive waste, no solution for that
    c) nuclear plants use huge amounts of water for cooling which is then evaporated, what isn’t is polluted with radioactivity (and also tritium which can’t be filtered out by the user) parentheses there for clarity (I hope)
    d) even the plants being proposed now (many but not all like the AP1000) don’t have to be hardened for deliberate airplane attacks
    e) even the ditto (d) can melt down and some are being sited and many others were where a meltdown could make a large swath of the east coast an evacuated contaminated zone for a long period
    f) if the US and EU and China and others insist on building more/new/additional nuclear plants how are we to stop nuclear weapons proliferation

    I suspect your (Bill Woods) comment to be a teensy disingenous, rather like an invitation for someone to post something you would then consider over-the-top re nuclear power plant risks. Or not. I mean this not like suddenly reading that drinking a beer a day causes cancer, which is sort of new idea in play (ok maybe its more and just women, but surely you all get my point here.)

    I happen to think that even if new nukes were totally safe, it would be too little and too late, not renewable, not particularly low carbon (and other worse greenhouse gases are involved and released in nuclear fuel fabrication and aren’t even measured.

    Plus the world has very little minable uranium left, a lot of it is in very arid areas of Australia (a lot of it tribal sacred lands) even though I understand that water is required to mine it…..

    It is not “domestic energy” either for that and other reasons (parts that have to be manufactured overseas.

    And on and on.

    Dangerous in implementation on many levels, and even more dangerous as an energy strategy.

  8. David B. Benson says:

    Sequester carbon as charcoal in forest soils:

  9. I adopt and approach that you allow us to dropby a while and look, listen, reflect and enjoy at your content