Culture and Coexistence into the Great Unknown
Finding innovative solutions to supplying efficient, clean, safe, renewable and reliable energy for electrical power, transportation, heating and cooling. We look at problems created from the addiction to dirty fossil fuel energy, mountaintop removal and ecosystem disruption, global climate change, severe air and water pollution, and community dislocation and pollution, Extreme methods such as hydraulic fracturing (fracking), tar sands, hydroelectric dams and other damaging methods and sources are examined.
While large fish fail to thrive at Southern California Edison’s artificial reef off the coast of San Clemente, California, mitigation mandated by the California Coastal Commission to repair destroyed kelp beds at their San Onofre Nuclear Plant (called SONGS), a wider marine mammal crisis is ongoing. Could radiation released from SONGS be the culprit in both cases?
Dear Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon, I received your letter in response to my earlier note imploring you to do all you can to prevent the completion of the Keystone XL Pipeline. Your words express your intent to do exactly the opposite of what I had asked. And to be frank, your words piss me off.
The State Department has issued a flawed environmental review of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline that ignores its far-reaching impacts on climate and our environment. Tar Sands Action Southern California has prepared a commentary on behalf of 40 groups to be submitted to the State Department demanding a comprehensive reassessment of the significant and irreversible impacts on the environment not taken into account in the draft report released on March 1st. Make your comment by April 22nd!
Despite what you’ve heard about natural gas being clean, fracking also contributes to climate change. Although the burning of the gas is clean, the process of fracking releases so much methane into the air, that if all the shale in California is fracked, it will delay the implementation of AB 32, California’s Global Warming Solutions Act, by 80 years.
The revenue generated from a Carbon Tax, which should really be called a fee, would be returned to the citizenry, either through reductions in taxes or monthly dividends. That money would offset any increase in the cost of gas at the pump and would off-set already exorbitant financial stress caused by carbon release (i.e. medical bills and (un)natural disaster relief).
Southern California Edison says its analysis confirms that it would be safe to fire up the nuclear plant’s Unit 2 reactor, but as a precautionary move it is proposing running it at only 70%. Yet it also suggests that running San Onofre at 100 percent for 11 months would present a strong possibility of a tube rupture resulting in a catastrophic release of radiation into the environment.
Joe Nocera in the New York Times believes Dr. James Hansen, because he is head of NASA’s Goddard Institute, should just shut up instead of participating in the anti-Keystone XL movement. Peter Jefferson Nichols argues this should be the role of any government scientist who recognizes the danger of passing climate tipping points, producing irreversible climate impacts.