Ron Paul believes, just like the other Republican front-runners in the 2012 election, that the price on fuel could be lowered if the US just allowed companies to drill for oil (both offshore and on land) in sensitive areas such as the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).

Dean Baker, co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, explained that oil drilling in ANWR wouldn’t result in any noteworthy changes to fuel prices. This idea would mean “a lot of risk both to the environment and the economy for really very little gain,” Baker said.

Here’s his full quote on drilling for oil in ANWR:

"We have a world market, so how much are we talking about increasing supply? The analyses I've seen from ANWR is that peak production – and we're typically talking about ten years or so until we get there – would be about a million barrels per day (bpd), and this is in the context of a world market of around 90 million bpd. So you're talking about lowering the price of oil maybe one or two per cent if you're lucky.

"And the amount that you can get from additional offshore drilling – because it's not as if we're drilling not at all now – that's typically put at around 200,000 – 300,000 bpd, so the impact is even less. To my mind, you're talking about risking a lot of environmental damage – these are also places where people fish, and it's also a big tourism destination – you don't want to go to a beach that's covered in oil. So you're talking about a lot of risk both to the environment and the economy for really very little gain."

#greenblog #ANWR

Embedded Link

Economists weigh in on Ron Paul
Al Jazeera speaks to five economists about the presidential candidate’s economic policies.

Google+: View post on Google+

Bill McKibben, founder of the +350.org movement and one of the key speakers at the event, said that this year the US Congress will give "billions of dollars in taxpayer money" to the fossil fuel industry:

"The thing we really want to start talking about today is the fact that this year, as most years, Congress will vote to give subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. Billions and billions of dollars in taxpayer money. Not because they need a subsidy. We’ve known how to burn coal and gas and oil for 250 years. There’s no secret to it that we need to subsidize for them to figure out. And it’s not because they need the money. They’re the most profitable industry on earth. Exxon made more money last year than any company in the history of money. What’s going on instead is that they are giving small presents to our legislators, and in return our legislators are giving them big presents with our money."

+Bernie Sanders, the only democratic socialist in the US Senate, who fought to block construction of the Keystone XL pipeline was also there to give his support. "We've got to end all of the tax breaks for the oil companies and coal companies and I'm going to introduce legislation to do just that," Sanders promised the demonstrators.

"Ending tax breaks and subsidies for oil and gas companies would reduce the deficit by more than $40 billion over the next 10 years. Sanders' legislation will end those tax breaks and tens of billions of dollars in other special subsidies for the fossil fuel industry.

The five largest oil companies in the United States have earned about $1 trillion in profits over the past decade. Meanwhile, in recent years, some of the very largest oil companies in America like Exxon Mobil and Chevron, paid absolutely nothing in federal income taxes. In fact, some of them have actually gotten rebates from the Internal Revenue Service."

You can read more about the huge tax breaks and subsidies that the fossil-fuel industry receives every year on Green Blog: http://bit.ly/AxMZx8

See photos from the event here: http://bit.ly/w5rWGh

#greenblog

Google+: View post on Google+

"Secretive oil billionaires attacking President Obama, with ads factcheckers say are “not tethered to the facts.” While independent watchdogs called this president’s record on ethics “unprecedented.” And America’s clean energy industry? 2.7 million jobs and “expanding rapidly.” For the first time in 13 years our dependence on foreign oil is below fifty percent. President Obama kept his promise to toughen ethics rules and strengthen America’s energy economy."

It’s interesting to note that Obama and the advertisement completely ignore to mention climate change. Instead of saying that fuel economy standards help reduce greenhouse gas emissions they are only described as a way to reduce our oil consumption. And the renewable energy investments are only mentioned in terms of job created. The advertisement also fails to mention that the dependence on foreign oil is largely due to a surge in oil and natural gas drilling and not because of a noteworthy decreased consumption.

#greenblog

Google+: View post on Google+

1. The Keystone XL pipeline would not reduce foreign oil dependency.
2. Contrary to popular opinion, Keystone XL would have increased domestic oil prices.
3. Proponents of the pipeline overstated the number of jobs that would be created.
4. Current Keystone pipeline leaked 12 times in last year.
5. And the environmental concerns about oil leaks are justified.
6. Mining tar sands would worsen global warming. Or in the words of NASA climate scientist James Hansen, be "game over for the planet."

Here is a little summary of the Keystone XL project so far:

1. Nebraska objects to the Keystone XL pipeline as they are concerned over potential oil spill accidents in the Ogallala Aquifer area, which supplies water to a large portion of US farm land. Climate activists around the US mobilized, and risked arrests in acts of civil disobedience, to raise the alarm about the environmental and climate risks of tar sands.

2. In response to Nebraska’s objections, TransCanada promises to find a better route for the pipeline and to revise the plans. But Republicans in the US congress decides to put an unreasonable deadline on the permit application to be able to gain political points in the upcoming general election. As a result of the deadline, TransCanada is not able to provide revised plan and the permit is incomplete.

3. Because TransCanada’s plans are incomplete the US government must reject the permit. If they were to approve the incomplete permit application they would set themselves up for easily winnable legal challenges by climate activists and pipeline opponents.

4. TransCanada will re-apply, and they will likely also win and get their pipeline permit a few months after the big presidential election. And considering Obama’s Keystone statement it probably won’t matter if there will be a Republican or a Democratic president in office by then.

#greenblog

Embedded Link

Six reasons Keystone XL was a bad deal all along
Here are six facts about the proposed Keystone XL deal that make clear why the pipeline was a bad deal for America and why it deserved to be rejected:

Google+: View post on Google+

“Speaking at Occupy Boston in October, standing with one hand plunged into a pants pocket, he seemed like a man still getting used to his activist rhetoric. Attacking the usual environmental villains – the Koch brothers, The US Chamber of Commerce, ExxonMobil – he appeared somewhat surprised to hear such unkind words coming out of his mouth. It’s not that he doesn’t believe in his cause – he does, passionately – or feel compelled to pursue it with all the energy he can muster. It’s just that “he has no lust for battle,” says Small. McKibben sometimes seems as if he’d rather be home with his wife and dog than out rallying the troops. “He is the Jimmy Stewart type of American hero who only stirs when provoked,” the minister says. “And he has been provoked.””

#greenblog

Embedded Link

The man who crushed the Keystone XL pipeline – The Boston Globe
Bill McKibben is a mild-mannered Vermont journalist who engineered history’s largest green protest and derailed a $7 billion oil pipeline.

Google+: View post on Google+

1. The nuclear crisis in Japan

2011 started with a massive earthquake that struck Japan with devastating effects. In the aftermaths of the earthquake and tsunami, Japan officials declared a state of emergency at two nuclear power plants in the Fukushima Prefecture. The state of emergency at the Fukushima Daiichi (No 1) plant and at the Fukushima Daini (No 2) plant was issued after problems with the cooling systems. While rescue workers tried their best to find and save people in the debris left by the tsunami we saw a nuclear crisis unfold in Japan. A crisis that will be felt for decades to come. So there is no wonder that our number one post on Green Blog was about the Fukushima nuclear accident.

http://www.green-blog.org/2011/03/12/nuclear-crisis-in-japan
http://www.green-blog.org/2011/03/11/nuclear-emergency-declared-in-japan-after-massive-earthquake

2. The Dangers of E-Waste

Our second most-read article had a more educational approach and instead tried to explained the term "e-waste" – something the author seems to have succeeded with quite well considering it's position here.

http://www.green-blog.org/2011/02/15/the-dangers-of-e-waste

3. Greenpeace shows the Dark Side of Volkswagen

The third most-read article on Green Blog highlighted a new Greenpeace campaign against Europe’s biggest car company Volkswagen (VW). Greenpeace claimed that the car maker is “spending millions” trying to stop stricter climate laws in Europe.

http://www.green-blog.org/2011/06/28/greenpeace-shows-the-dark-side-of-volkswagen

4. US media censor out BBC TV “Frozen Planet” series climate change episode

In our fourth most-read article, +Gideon Polya reported that the US will not air the “On Thin Ice” episode of David Attenborough’s “Frozen Planet” BBC TV series about wildlife in the Arctic and Antarctica. The censored out and final episode deals with the impact of man-made climate change, a matter controversial to a substantial body of anti-science, climate change denialist Americans.

http://www.green-blog.org/2011/11/25/us-media-censor-out-bbc-tv-frozen-planet-series-climate-change-episode

5. The lightbulb conspiracy

The fifth most popular article discussed the Norwegian TV documentary, “The lightbulb conspiracy”. A documentary that details a process that few people outside of manufacturing industry’s are even aware exists. The so-called “planned obsolescence” scam. Ever had a digital camera suddenly stop working after several thousand shots for no obvious reason? That's planned obsolescence.

http://www.green-blog.org/2011/06/13/the-lightbulb-conspiracy

6. The Nuclear Meltdown of George Monbiot

The blog post on sixth place also had a connection to the Fukushima nuclear accident. In this post David Carson discussed how George Monbiot, Britain’s leading environmental journalists, changed his stance on nuclear energy.

http://www.green-blog.org/2011/04/18/the-nuclear-meltdown-of-george-monbiot

7. Climate Wars by Gwynne Dyer

During 2011 +Benno Hansen did a review/summary about Gwynne Dyer's book "Climate Wars". The book discusses the threats of future conflicts and wars thought over dwindling resources and changing climates.

http://www.green-blog.org/2011/01/17/climate-wars-by-gwynne-dyer

8. Nuclear energy might see increased opposition after Japan crisis

And yet again we have a blog post related to the awful nuclear accident in Japan in 2011. The Fukushima nuclear crisis sparked new life in the nuclear energy debate in many countries around the world. And the fear for possible nuclear accidents in other countries forced politicians to reconsider and review their current energy policy stance.

http://www.green-blog.org/2011/03/14/nuclear-energy-might-see-increased-opposition-after-japan-crisis

9. How to Make Bodycare Products

In a popular how-to post, Leah Karpus showed how you can make your own bodycare products. "Unlike typical commercially produced cosmetics that boast a list of ingredients a mile long (if they even list their ingredients), you can be 100% sure that your homemade products are natural, non-toxic and safe."

http://www.green-blog.org/2011/01/09/how-to-make-bodycare-products

10. The environmental record of Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry

And finally, on tenth place, we have a blog post discussing the awful environmental record of +Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry. All three who are, and was, leading Republican presidential hopefuls in the 2012 Republican primary.
http://www.green-blog.org/2011/08/17/mitt-romney-michele-bachmann-and-rick-perry/

#greenblog

Google+: View post on Google+

There is enormous potential in renewable energy that can meet our current and future needs. Here are a few facts worth knowing about wind power’s renewable energy:

• A single wind turbine can power over 300 homes if it is well designed. To start a turbine, the winds only need to reach fourteen miles per hour, so places with light wind such as the UK are able to use it with ease.
• Wind power was used as far back as 5000 BCE for ships, wind mills, and power pumps.
• Contrary to popular thought, wind power is not harmful to birds. A study by NASA has shown that windmills have no significant impact on birds.
• In 2008, enough wind power was generated in the U.S. to power the entire state of Colorado

While these facts are impressive, even more information is being discovered about wind power all the time. It seems only fitting that Google, a company that is based on information and technology, can start funding a project that will lead to more wind power findings. In the Atlantic Ocean, Google is investing $5 billion on a 350 mile stretch of land from New Jersey to Virginia to create a large scale wind farm. The strong winds that blow over the sea are ideal for a wind farm because of all the energy they can produce. It will be a pioneer effort to become the first U.S. offshore wind farm in full operation. Google is hoping to attract other companies to the project by investing a substantial 37.5 percent of the initial funds.

Google representatives are as excited about the project as the “green geeks.” The Director of Green Business Operations and Strategy at Google, Rick Needham, describes the project as a “superhighway” of energy. He stated that not being afraid to take risks has gotten the company to where it is today and that they hope that this will be a good example to other companies on what can be possible. The project is called the Atlantic Wind Connection. Once completed, the project will bring wind energy to an estimated 2 million homes.

Last year, Google invested in 20 years of wind energy and created a branch in the company called Google Energy. This doesn’t necessarily mean that Google is taking over everyone’s power bills. Rather, it means that the company is actively seeking alternative, greener, sources of energy to power its infrastructure in the future. Any excess energy the company might generate it plans to sell to back to the grid, so that everything from our home computers to our garage doors can be powered by clean energy.

The technology giant not only wants to be at the front line of efforts to go green, but also believes that this will be a good business practice for others to imitate. The company is liaised with Good Energies, a European and American investment company, as well as Marubeni, out of Japan.

We can hope that more efforts such as these can help bring the nation to energy independence and spark new hope for the people to know that they will have a safe place to work and live in the future.

“Our home—Earth—is in trouble. VW opposes key environmental laws we need if we’re going to stop our planet going the way of Alderaan (bye bye). But all is not lost. We feel the good in Volkswagen. All of us in the Rebellion are calling on Volkswagen to turn away from the Dark Side and give our planet a chance.”

According to Greenpeace the automaker “is spending millions of Euros every year funding lobby groups who are trying to stop Europe increasing its commitment to greenhouse gas reductions from 20% to 30% by 2020″. Volkswagen “can’t afford to be left behind” while more “progressive companies” like Google, Ikea, Sony, Unilever and Philips supports the tougher climate targets, Greenpeace writes on their new campaign website. They also call for Volkswagen to stop with its lobbying work and instead support stronger fuel efficiency targets that will benefit both consumers and our climate:

“More efficient cars are cheaper to run, use less oil and emit less CO2. Volkswagen has a history of lobbying against the strong European standards that we need to kick our oil addiction. As the biggest car company in Europe, with the biggest responsibility, VW must change and support strong standards from now on.”

Greenpeace also want to see that Volkswagen make their entire car fleet oil-free by the year 2040 saying the automaker should put their technology where their mouth is.

“Volkswagen says it wants to be “the most eco-friendly automaker in the world”, but only 6% of the cars it sold in 2010 were its most efficient models. It has the technology to do better. VW must set out its plan to make its entire fleet oil-free by 2040.”

Sign the “rebel manifesto” here and help put pressure on Volkswagen. You can also read Greenpeace’s report for a more detailed look on the Dark Side of Volkswagen. Watch the video:

“There are game-changers and then there are world-changers. From Internet giants working to make renewable energy cheaper than coal, to a sea captain monitoring the ocean’s plastic waste, to the growth of intentional communities (they’re not just for hippies anymore)—welcome to Plenty’s second annual list honoring (in no particular order) 20 dynamic individuals and 20 pioneering companies that are bettering the planet, plus 10 innovative ideas that will revolutionize how we live.”

Head over to their site or purchase their latest issue to get bios and explanations on, what they call, the Plenty 20.

Here they are, the Plenty 20 people:

• Al Gore
• Andrew Revkin
• Charles Moore
• David de Rothschild
• Fred Krupp
• Frederick Kirschenmann
• Heidi Cullen
• James Hansen
• Joe Lovett
• Kathleen Sebelius
• Kevin Wall
• Lester Brown
• Maude Barlow
• Michael Pollan
• Mindy Lubber
• Nicholas Negroponte
• Peter Diamandis
• Van Jones
• Vinod Khosla
• William McDonough & Michael Braungart

And here are the Plenty 20 businesses:

• A123 System
• Applied Materials
• Arup
• Bon Appétit Management Company
• Coskata
• Environmental Working Group
• Forest Stewardship Council
• Google
• Home Depot
• Iberdrola
• IBM
• Innovest Strategic Value Advisors
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
• Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams
• Nike
• Patagonia
• Pizza Fusion
• RecycleBank
• Swiss Re
• TransFair USA

What do you think? Have Plenty chosen the right people? And can a business really be green?

It’s time to clear this up folks. Hopefully you already know that surfing with a black background (on your computer screen) will not always save energy. If not, let me explain why black backgrounds aren’t that green.

Black backgrounds can save some energy if you use a CRT screen (CRT screens are those huge and big screens). If you, like the majority, uses an LCD screen (the flat ones) a white background instead of a black will save energy.

LCD monitors are built with a light behind the screen that is always on. So when you show a white page you just let the light shine through the screen. If you show a black page on the other hand the LCD light is completely blocked and it requires more energy to shine through.

According to Google “displaying black may actually increase energy usage”.

Blackle and SaveAndSearch are two of a few sites that is based on the idea that surfing with a black background on websites will save energy and therefore be good for the environment. But unfortunately surfing black isn’t really that green.

If you are interested in saving energy and helping the environment there are better and more efficient ways than using black or white backgrounds when you surf or search the web.