Friday, 30 Jan 2004

Swinging Both Ways

Bush Announces Environmental Money for Swing States

A recent flurry of announcements from the Bush administration about proposed funding increases for environmental projects -- including salmon restoration and brush clearing in the Northwest, Everglades protection in Florida, and cleanup of the Great Lakes -- has some enviros suspicious. Not that they aren't glad to have a bit more money going to good causes. But they point out that the funding increases have several things in common: they are for programs the administration pushed to cut as recently as last year; they represent a fraction of the money requested by the affected parties; they were announced with fanfare in an election year; and, most significantly, they funnel money to crucial electoral battleground states. "God help you if you're waiting for EPA to clean up a toxic waste site outside of a swing state," said Phil Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust. The White House rejected the contention that its announcements were politically motivated.

Sunny Disposition

Activist Strives to Make Solar Hip, Not Hippie

Photovoltaic solar cells are one of the most reliable energy sources in the world -- not to mention one of the cleanest. But many people still think of solar as a washout from the Carter era, about as sexy as a hemp tunic, laments Adam Browning, this week's Grist diarist. As cofounder of Vote Solar Initiative in San Francisco, Browning is working to give this underappreciated energy source an image makeover -- and to promote solar and energy-efficient technologies in municipalities around the U.S. He can thank Bonnie Raitt for helping to push the cause -- and, if all goes as planned, George Hamilton too. (What could be better than the Man with the Tan pitching the benefits of sun-derived energy?) Read about the glamorous (ahem) life of a solar activist -- only on the Grist Magazine website.

A Breath of Somewhat Fresher Air

Scientists Recommend Solutions to Coming Air-Quality Challenges

Though the past three decades have seen substantial progress, concerted action is needed to prevent air pollution from adversely affecting the environment and human health now and in the future, reported the National Research Council of the National Academies, a nonpartisan scientific panel chartered by Congress to assess current air-quality standards. Population and economic growth will soon make current regulations inadequate, said the scientists, who evinced particular concern about ozone (a precursor to smog) and fine particulates of soot. The panel endorsed expanding cap-and-trade systems, a recommendation that may please the Bush administration, but also urged that global warming be taken into account when passing air-quality laws, a provision likely to chafe the administration, which has accepted that the Earth is spherical in shape and revolves around the sun, but hasn't quite gotten on board with the whole climate-change thing.

Cow-a-Bungle

How to Fix Our Food-Inspection System and Find Cleaner, Greener Beef

American citizens are the ones who should be mad over bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). Mad cow disease might have been prevented from striking U.S. cattle if the federal government had been on the ball, doing all it should to ensure food safety. Since December, when a BSE-contaminated cow was discovered in Washington state, the feds have instituted a few new regulations designed to protect meat-eaters and soothe public jitters, but are they enough? Nope, say the authors of our latest Earthly Possessions column. Don't trust the government to keep your meat safe; trust organic producers instead. Get the details, some appetizing discussion of cow guts, scrapie, and prions, and advice on finding safe and eco-friendly sources of beef -- only on the Grist Magazine website. But we warn you: Don't read it while you're eating.

Footprint on the Gas

Exxon Responsible for 5 Percent of All Historical CO2 Emissions

Since its founding as the Standard Oil Trust in 1882, ExxonMobil and its predecessor companies have been responsible for between 4.7 and 5.3 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Ever. In the whole world. So claims a report, "Exxon's Climate Footprint," drawn from two studies commissioned by Friends of the Earth International. Exxon's historical emissions amount to about 22 billion tons -- three times the current annual global emissions total. The report also condemns the company for its long history of undermining climate change science and policy, particularly in lobbying against the Kyoto Protocol. ExxonMobil took issue with the report, pointing out that its energy-conservation efforts have led to a 37 percent increase in efficiency over the past 25 years. Besides, worrying about massive global climate disruption isn't good for the bottom line: "We don't invest to make social statements at the expense of shareholder return," ExxonMobil CEO Lee Raymond said last year.