The day Palin accepted her party's V.P. nomination was a day that produced two indelible impressions in our human and natural worlds.
But only the human impression resonated on the news.
"Drill, baby drill!"
Yet the exact same day, the largest Canadian ice sheet, the 4500 year old massive Makham Ice Sheet broke off in the Arctic Ocean!
The Makham, combined with two other Canadian ice sheets that broke off earlier this summer, totaled half of the entire Canadian ice shelf.
Or about the size of 3 Manhattans, (the city).
Let's pause.
Do you get the significance?
Visualize eco-systems lost, threatened, and endangered.
According to climatologists this is due to global warming, and to come...
flooding & drought.
Now, here's your reminder from me:
Yes on 7, No on 10 for California residents interested in the faster track to renewable energy and clean fuels.
Yes on 7 strives to make California 50% renewable energy by 2025.
No on 10 is a vote against 5 billion in bonds toward funding natural gas, which is 30-40% cleaner than petroleum, a bridge to move toward cleaner fuels but not the cleanest fuels and transportation technology available.
Go direct toward the cleanest fuel and cars now.
S. David Freeman, former energy advisor to Presidents Kennedy, Nixon, and Johnson, and leader of some of America's largest power utilities, including the Tennessee Authority, New York power, SMUD (Sacramento power) and LADWP (Los Angeles power) supported Yes on 7 this morning on NBC Newsmakers round-table with Conan Nolan.
"Mother Nature set the time table... Climatologists tell us if we don't get off fossil fuels, life as we know it won't survive."
Freeman wore his signature cowboy hat, the one that earned him the reputation as the Green Cowboy. Or, in other words, the guy lassoing energy efficiency into place.
"Clean energy is essential for our survival," Freeman stated. "We've at least got to try to fast track processes to bring renewable energy into place."
The measure's detractor was from NRDC. He was much less convincing as he spoke, saying Prop 7 would kill the small solar industry, make a mess of producing transmission lines, and pricing would suppress competition.
Freeman reminded him that Los Angeles only gets 8% of its energy from renewables, and small companies like those putting solar panels on roofs will stay in business.
"We need to fast-track production and transmission of renewable energy now. The status quo does not mention Mother Nature's time table. Let's try," Freeman implored. "We can't afford to wait for the status quo."
I agree. Yes on 7.
Moving on to No on Prop 10.
A rep from the Sierra Club went on about No on Prop 10 while I ate oatmeal and toast.
My notes from breakfast are a bit fuzzy but go something like this,
"It's a wrong direction for a dead-end.... (missed that word in my notes)... Trading petroleum for natural gas, which is only a little cleaner, is the wrong way to go.
Mr. Sierra Club mentioned T. Boone Pickens financed this ballot. He cited we're making progress in better directions like trucks at ports but we don't need a wrong way detour with natural gas. We don't need a measure favoring one individual.
Bottom-line.
Voting Yes on 7 and No on 10 in my opinion reflects the most direct route to trying to fast-track cleaner-air technologies, and save Mother Earth.
Above photo I took this summer on the melting Athabasca Glacier on Columbia Icefield in Canada.
P.S. I keep hearing how "poorly written Prop 7" is and this is used as an excuse not to pass a meaningful goal toward California's clean energy independence. I don't buy it but if you do, next time you want to put a renewable energy initiative on the ballot call me. I know how to write clearly and get a message across.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure to subscribe to the Chasing Clean Air RSS Feed!
