Memo to Media: The environmental community is now going into overdrive on the climate and clean energy bill, as this recent move by WWF underscores.
WWF is one of the world’s most progressive environmental groups, in the Sierra Club vein, and they are the largest member-based conservation organization in the world. They understand that all of their important local and regional efforts to save biodiversity will come to naught if we don’t stop Hell and High Water. It’s great to see them getting actively involved in this crucial issue.
WWF fully understands what’s at stake, as their “campaign blog” press release makes clear:
The campaign officially kicked-off with TV ads debuting in five states that will be key to passage of a climate bill in the US Senate: Alaska, Indiana, Maine, Montana and North Dakota. Nationally, WWF introduced the website, ActForOurFuture.org, which provides information about the impact climate change is already having on the U.S. and how people can actively support climate legislation, which is expected to be introduced in the Senate in early September.
“Climate change is one of the most urgent issues of our times, and without meaningful climate legislation, our legacy to future generations will be a world where many of the places we love and the things we care about will be a thing of the past,” said WWF President and CEO Carter Roberts. “Our campaign brings that message directly to the voters. We’re asking Americans to contact their Senators and ask them to vote ‘yes’ on legislation that will help protect us from the worst consequences of climate change.”
According to the recently released report Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States, prepared by 13 federal science agencies, climate change is already having a direct and negative effect on the American people, impacting “water, energy, transportation, agriculture, ecosystems, and health” all across the nation. Every region of the country is experiencing significant, adverse impacts from climate change including more severe droughts, floods, heat waves and wildfires – and these impacts will worsen during the course of the century if action is not taken to slow climate change.
I worked with World Wildlife Fund (WWF) for many years on their Climate Savers campaign aimed at “Mobilizing Companies to cut carbon dioxide“:
By 2010, the Climate Savers companies will collectively cut carbon emissions by some 14 million tons annually – the equivalent of taking more than 3 million cars off the road every year. By increasing efficiency, Climate Savers companies are saving hundreds of millions of dollars, proving again that protecting the environment makes good business sense.
For more on Climate Savers, go to LetTheCleanEconomyBegin.org.
WWF understands that voluntary efforts to reduce emissions, while important for demonstrating to the business community, media, and opinion makers that any company can cost-effectively reduce CO2, can’t preserve a livable climate.
They have put together some terrific state-based videos (see here). And they also have a good region-by-region climate change impact discussion here.
The video above explains the basics of calling your senator. More info is here.
Kudos to WWF for this move.
Previous in TP Climate Progress
Bravo to WWF!
FYI, according to a simple calculation based on a key number they provide, I estimate that the use of ExxonMobil products alone generates roughly 1.1 Trillion pounds of CO2 each year. That’s just from the use of the products — and doesn’t even include production, processing, and etc. And — for perspective — that’s more than the entire weight of humankind on Earth, i.e., more than all 6.8 billion of us weigh, in total.
To the WWF: I’ve done an examination and analysis of ExxonMobil from a large number of angles relevant to climate change and related matters. (I have a chemical engineering and business background and also worked in the oil industry long ago.) I’ve put the results on a DVD. I’d be happy to send you a copy or two if you’d send me the appropriate name(s) and address(es).
My goal is to help inform the media and climate-oriented organizations so they, in turn, can do a better job of informing the public.
Be Well,
Jeff
I wrote to my Senator, Kay Baily Hutchison and she repeated so oft said misrepresentations of the bill. See if you can spot them here:
Dear Friend:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the American Clean Energy and Security Act. I welcome your thoughts and comments.
In our effort to reduce emissions, I believe we must invest in alternative sources of energy. Wind, solar, nuclear, and biomass are clean, safe and effective sources of power. Their increased use would create thousands of jobs and allow us to produce energy for Americans, by Americans.
Some Members of Congress have expressed their intent to mandate a cap-and-trade policy to be imposed on all Americans. I believe that cap-and-trade would increase energy prices. In 2008, Peter Orszag, who then served as the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, and who now serves as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, testified before the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Finance on the implications of a cap-and-trade regime. In his testimony, Director Orszag stated, “Under a cap-and-trade program, firms would not ultimately bear most of the costs of the allowances but instead would pass them along to their customers in the form of higher prices.”
For this reason, I believe that a cap-and-trade approach to address climate change would be onerous and would adversely impact the economy. It could create economic hardship for farmers, ranchers, workers and small businesses, in addition to consumers. The last thing our nation needs during this time of economic hardship is higher energy prices and higher levels of unemployment due to a federal mandate passed down from Washington.
As cap-and-trade legislation comes before the Senate, I will keep your comments in mind. I appreciate hearing from you, and I hope you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue that is important to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
284 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
202-224-5922 (tel)
202-224-0776 (fax)
http://hutchison.senate.gov
PLEASE DO NOT REPLY to this message as it is not a valid e-mail address. Due to the tremendous volume of mail Senator Hutchison receives, she requests that all email messages be sent through the contact form found on her website at http://hutchison.senate.gov/contact.cfm .
If you would like more information about issues pending before the Senate, please visit the Senator’s website at http://hutchison.senate.gov . You will find articles, floor statements, and press releases, along with her weekly column and monthly television show on current events. You can also sign up to receive Senator Hutchison’s weekly e-newsletter.
I am a little surprised the Hutchison letter does not simply call cap-and-trade “an energy tax”. There are relatively many commercials here in ND related to the issue, but it is played basically as “green jobs” versus “energy tax”. The WWF commercial is the only one I see making a direct point on the environment. I would have at least liked to see/hear something more maybe snuck into the WWF commercial saying to the effect of scientists say it will continue to get worse. That I could not think of a pithy way to make my point there perhaps illustrates part of why that message is not on the airwaves.
Senator Dorgan (or “supporters of” or something – he speaks in it) has a commercial pushing the need for energy and the jobs that can be had in ND with that. Fossil fuels are included in the spot, but I still hope this is a positive sign that at very least Dorgan would not be inclined to aid a filibuster. However, it very well could be an attempt to try to position himself for his 2010 re-election bid as someone who wants all kind of energy jobs but may have to vote against those liberals who want to harm the fossil fuel industry. Energy is widely hailed as helping keep the ND economy relatively strong during the current downturn.
I question how effective this campaign will be. While it’s good in that we’re doing something, the call to action is an old one and is not compelling to the general public, historically. We need less brow beating and more emotional, compelling reasons to make ecosmarts a part of our daily life. Those of us who know our future is endangered are already convinced, it’s the general public that needs more than brow beating.