Global warming is why you are freezing.

For anyone who has to deal with the climate deniers who, like Sen. Inhofe, would point to the recent cold weather storms as evidence that global warming is a hoax, there is a very good, easily understandable story in the NY Times this week. Juath Cohen manages to make it so clear that even Sen. Inhofe should be able to understand it.

All of this cold was met with perfect comic timing by the release of a World Meteorological Organization report showing that 2010 will probably be among the three warmest years on record, and 2001 through 2010 the warmest decade on record.

Read the full text here:

Hope on global warming? Not likely.

It has always been easy for Greens and others who consider themselves progressives to find reasons for the easy reception of the climate change denial message. We blame it all on the power of corporate advertising, on lobbyists, on the evil nature of a pair of ex-junkies (Beck and Limbaugh) on talk radio, on our own failures to adequately frame our own messages.

This morning I read a very different view that Dr. Genevieve Marcus forwarded to the Green California Forum. It was an LA times OpEd (now available only in archives for a fee) by Ted Kennedy biographer, Neal Gabler, in which Gabler asserted that conservatism had been transformed from a political movement into a religious one, where the certainty that one is right is much more powerful than rational discourse.

It's understandable that liberals prefer to think of their subordination as a matter of their own inadequacies or of conservative wiles. Theoretically, you can learn how to improve your message or how to match wits with adversaries, and a lot of liberal hand-wringing has been dedicated to doing just that. But it is becoming increasingly clear that liberals haven't just been succumbing to superior message control, or
even to a superior political narrative (conservatives' frontier individualism versus liberals' communitarianism). They are up against something far more intractable and far more difficult to defeat. They are up against religion.

It reminds me of book I had read long ago, The True Believer by Eric Hoffer or The Captive Mind by Cseslaw Milosz. The word of Milosz seems most to come to mind: "The voice of passion is better than the voice of reason. The passionless cannot change history."


Even highly respected figures like Joe Romm (Climate Progress) mix it up in the media ring in order to get the story told rationally. Today, he went after the NewsHour program on PBS for it's failure to admit that CO2 is a primary cause of our current climate change.

Greens want to arrive at a solution to our climate, energy and water problems that will provide a sustainable future for all. In order to do so, we have to provide sensible policy options in the current, highly charged political environment and then champion them with just as much passion as Gabler recognizes in the political fundamentalism that currently unites what is left of the Republican Party.

We seem not to be able to do both a the same time. Bill McKibben can raise our passions with 350.org, but he absolutely refuses to deal with policy. The writers at any number of sites can discuss policy until sunrise but often with a passion for action. Those who have both, Dr. James Hansen for example, have become the enemy of the climate deniers. But this weekend, Hansen, who has just recovered from surgery and treatment for cancer, joined students outside the Massachusetts Statehouse who refuse to sleep in dorms/apartments powered by coal-fired electricity.

I closely follow the machinations of the US Senate where our own Sen Boxer chairs the Committee on Environment and Public Works. There is where the search for votes has backed her into the corner of allowing Joe Liebermann and Lindsey Graham rewrite a bill that was only marginally successful.

Unless we offer alternatives we will never be the alternative. It is time that we push forward our policies with a passion, a passion for action rather than rhetoric, offering policies that point to a future of sustainable living instead of joining the Republicans to "just say no."

Health Care and Global Warming

As I mentioned in a previous post, global warming is already helping to spread tripical diseases into new areas. Even where the diseases are already present, the type of dust storms that plague Australia right now will come to California and the Southwest and spread disease.

Consider Valley Fever, which I had to read about in a UK paper.

Higher temperatures and more intense storms are also linked to "valley fever", a disease contracted from a fungus in the soil of the central valley of California. The American Academy of Microbiology estimates that about 200,000 Americans go down with valley fever each year, 200 of whom die. The number of cases in Arizona and California almost quadrupled in the decade to 2006.

You can not lower the cost of health care if you don't begin to address global warming.

We are running out of time and the face of disaster is not the polar bear, even though that is what change.org and the NRDC thinks will make you open your wallet. Well, here is the human face of climate change and it is happening now.

Battling intellectual smog

California's AB 32 was intended (so they say) to help this state battle global warming by controlling greenhouse gases. That would alleviate problems that we have with physical world smog.

Unfortunately, there a those who still believe Any Rand and that regulation is evil and they produce an even more insidious intellectual smog. It is reported that a CSU-Sacramento Report estimates the "cost" to small businesses from California's AB 32 at $50,000 per year.

UCLA Economics professor, Matthew I Kahn, provide a good analysis of why they get it wrong.

How long can you tread water?

That quotation from Bill Cosby's well known recording of a conversation between God and Noah. I will use it as the point from which I dive in to a sequence of reviews of current issues. Of course, this one is Global Warming (Climate Change? Climate Disruption?) and it's associated Sea Level Rise.

Take the jump (Read more!) to get the story in a less entertaining presentation.


On Tuesday of this week, the US Global Change Research Program will release a report on Global Climate Change Impacts in United States. This is the subject of Joe Romm's blogging at Climate Progress today. Romm is putting his focus on Sea Level Rise and what we are learning from the fact that the Greenland Ice Sheets are melting faster than anticipated.

I suggest following the link and reading Romm's post as well as the sources he cites where subscriptions are not required. This is Romm's conclusion:

The entire U.S. should be planning on SLR of 5 feet by 2100 on our current emissions path. And the eastern United States should plan on the very real possibility that total sea level rise will exceed 6 feet.

There are many areas of California that will be affected, beach communities, homes on the edge of bluffs, but none of them is close to that which will be suffered by the California Delta. The oft-mentioned pumps at Tracy that suck the water from the Delta and send it down south for drinking and irrigation are only 7 ft above sea level. Salt water intrusion into the Delta will significantly raise the costs of providing water. Those who oppose desalination for environmental reasons may have no choice other than moving somewhere else.

I see effects from the changing climate all of the time. As a backyard orchardist, I note that the trees are having to adapt to different cycles of weather. On a recent weather TV weather report, they commented that the ocean outside the Golden Gate was 10 deg. F warmer than normal. Rather than warming the land, however, it is increasing out humidity allowing the fog to roll in further, deeper and holding down the temperatures now. Logical consequence, but not what many might anticipate.

As Greens we all need to step up our presence in this war. It is a war, against Planet Earth, and sadly, we are winning. As Willie Loman's wife says in Death of a Salesman, "Attention must be paid." Willie died a suicide. As a human race, might we also be suicidal?

Health Care Cost Reduction

Today, I received another Green Party Release on Single Payer Health Care. I think that there is a great deal of benefit in the Single Payer Health Care system but those benefits are mostly from the fact that it is the only way to ensure adequate coverage for the entire population. It will, in itself, do very little to reduce the cost of health care in America.

In order to reduce health care costs, we need to improve the health of our population and that is not going to be easy. I will look at a few additional things if you click Read more!.


To begin with, it is necessary to pay attention to the links between health care costs and environmental action / non-action. A recent article by Sarah Boseley, Health Editor from The Guardian (UK) warns us that "Climate change biggest threat to health".

Rising global temperatures would have a catastrophic effect on human health, the doctors said, and patterns of infection would change, with insect-borne diseases such as malaria and dengue fever spreading more easily.

Heatwaves such as occurred in Europe in 2003, which caused up to 70,000 "excess" deaths, will become more common, as will hurricanes, cyclones and storms, causing flooding and injuries.

I don't think that America is ready for malaria to become a disease we need to be concerned about. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is, thankfully, pouring significant money into the research needed to end epidemic malaria. I hope that they do the job for all the world.

This is really old news. I mentioned in early 2008 that Stanford University has released a study on the Health Consequences of Global Warming. That same page called attention to the $3 Billion / yr cost of Air Pollution in the San Joaquin Valley and the direct effect it has on young children.

If we are going to make radical changes in the cost of health care, it means that we have to make radical changes in our attitude about ecological issues.

In a similar manner, we need to make changes in life style to reduce the amount of obesity that is prevalent in modern society. The rising rates of diabetes, a long term chronic illness, is a significant component of our rising health care costs.

This Highlight summarizes findings from AHRQ's Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) using hospital care data to examine how diabetes-related complications affect health status, hospitalizations, and economic costs. For example:

* Cardiovascular disease and lower extremity amputations are significantly more likely to occur in patients with diabetes than those without the condition.
* Multiple hospitalizations are common among individuals with diabetes and certain vulnerable populations are more likely to experience multiple hospital stays.
* The complications associated with diabetes result in significant costs to the health care system, particularly for public insurance programs, and are largely preventable.
(US Dept. of Health and Human Services)

We still seem to complain about the costs but are unwilling to adapt our own lives. We must begin to view the problems of health care as ecological as well as administrative. We need both sets of solutions.

What will we eat when California Ag disappers?

The title is a serious question that should concern all Americans. California is the largest agriculture producer in the United States. According to the California Department of Food and Agriculture:

With 88,000 farms and ranches, California agriculture is nearly a $36.6 billion dollar industry that generates $100 billion in related economic activity.

In a story in today's LA Times, Energy Secretary Steven Chu is quoted as saying that "'We're looking at a scenario where there's no more agriculture in California." This, in a state that can not even find enough money to pass a budget. When you take away the number one industry in the state, what future does it have?

What is our legislature doing about it? Not a damned thing. Even a normally progressive State Assemblymember, Jared Huffman (D - 6th AD) has introduced AB-39 that seeks to implement the very flawed Delta Vision Task Force Recommendations that, unfortunately, do not consider the impact of what Dr. Chu is saying.

I am too irate to write a plausible plan for what we should be doing. I just know it is not what we are doing now.

Weather or Climate: Calilfornia's future at stake

There is a lot of speculation about the weather. We tend to think of the weather as being cyclical. Summer / winter. If you live in the Southwest, rain / drought. The rain that we are having this week removed the possibility that this will be the driest January on record, but the fact remains that the drought conditions from the past two years are still with us. Most of the rain soaked into the ground and there was little runoff.

Four major California newspapers remind their readers just what this all means. Follow me to the full story by clicking Read more!.


Four California newspapers have stories today on the rain and what it does not mean.

Mike Taugher, environmental reporter for the Contra Costa Times writes: Rain not enough to fix water woes

Depleted reservoirs, a snowpack that still is expected to be about one-third lower than average after the clouds blow away and a raft of new water rules meant to revive collapsing fish populations are combining to severely pinch water supplies.

The nation's largest irrigation district, the 600,000-acre Westlands Water District, told growers this week it expected to get zero Delta water this year, something that has never happened before.

This theme was echoed in the other stories.

The Visalia Times-Delta headlines it as an economic problem with no immediate solution. Water shortage could cost 40,000 ag jobs, $1.15b in income. At least we know the scope.

The Fresno Bee also covers the agricultural impact. Forecast dry for West Valley: Growers could see no federal water deliveries if storms don't come.

These newspapers all treat our current rain as a weather event, part of the normal patterns and predictable. This just happens to be a year when La Niña effects control the rain.

The Merced Sun-Star points out the decisions that we need to make about using the water that we have. Water: Cities, agriculture compete for precious, dwindling resource

Ever-expanding cities in Merced County -- still minor users in the broader picture -- are increasingly competing for water with farmers and the environment. This urban-rural-ecological division wouldn't be as much of an issue if climate change wasn't bearing down on the age-old weather pattern people have come to expect.

Less rain in the future will mean less water for more people, crops and local ecosystems.

In preparation for this looming shift, state and federal authorities are trying to lessen the effects of both climate change and its human causes.

But local land use, development and their impacts on water planning comprise another issue. Today, a collection of interests compete over the same sources of water. The success or failure of local preparations for the impending water crisis will make all the difference.

Only the Merced Sun-Star gets to the real problem. Given the reality that the climate change is happening all around us, it is more likely than not that this year's rainfall will be the norm for future years. The land use / agricultural impact of such drastic change is still not being considered; not by the media, defintelyh not by our politicians.

This is a great opportunity for Green thinking, should we care to use it. Green candidates have a message that this state needs to hear and I mean all over this State. In the Central Valley, we need Green Party Candidates to pull back the curtain and reveal what others are afraid to deal with... that there is nothing in agricultural or natural resource policies that will provide for such changes.

Mark Twain never met Senator Inhofe.

Mark Twain and Senator James Inhofe lived in different eras and so never met. However, Twain would have recognized him immediately. Twain wrote:

The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a man only tells them with all his might. San Francisco Alta California, June 16, 1867

So we now have Senator Inhofe declaring victory over Al Gore, George Soros, Barbara Streisand and all those who support the idea of Global Warming.

I have in front of me just what’s happened this month in terms of the scientists that are coming over that used to be on the other side and have now become skeptics. And it’s overwhelming. The 650 scientists, and I quoted many of them, in fact, most of those are on my website. But I really think it’s important, first of all, for people to understand where the science is on this. Then understand where the money is. I mean, this whole thing started, like a lot of bad things in my narrow view, with the United Nations. And then of course Hollywood got ahold of it, and MoveOn.org and Barbara Streisand and George Soros and the rest of them. So, it became a huge money thing.

That "I have in front of me" phrase echos of another Senator with a penchant for lying, Joseph McCarthy. I remember listening to the hearings with McCarthy screaming about his list of Communists in government. They had about the same reality as Sen. Inhofe's list of 650 Scientists. Must we suffer through this again? Where is the new Murrow? He obviously no longer resides at CBS or 60 Minutes would be doing a number on another Senator.

Big plans sinking

One of the big plans for San Francisco… at least big enough to get ex-Supervisor Tony Hall fired… has been the creation of a wonderful new development on Treasure Island. It was supposed to be an ecotopia. That was in 2005. We have heard about it for years.

Now, according to the San Francisco Examiner's John Upton, the developer is going to have to do a lot of filling just to get housing above the level of the rising sea. They claim it will be 3 ft in the next 70 years. Then, what are they going to do. The rising waters will not stop then. Will they build on hydraulic stilts?

Tell me one more time why it is too expensive to do anything about global warming now?

Union of Concerned Scientists to Obama: Act Now

The Union of Concerned Scientist has sent out an action alert to tell Obama that now is the time to act responsibly on climate change. Their definition of responsibility is very much in line with what the Green Party's EcoAction Committee put out last spring as a 100 Day Action Plan on the Environment.

I urge all to check this out and take on any of their proposed actions. They make the point that so many others do not… "The most expensive thing we can do is nothing."

My take on James Hansen

I may have a different view of James Hansen than most. I have looked at a number of his statements / projections over time. Two things impress me.

While others call him an alarmist and worse, his projections have generally been about the most accurate description of what is happening and when they miss the mark, they are always too low. Climate Change is happening faster and with more effects than anyone anticipated. Obviously there are more positive feedback loops than known that are accelerating the process. So, when he says we need to get emissions back down to 350, I believe the number.

Secondly, I read Hansen as being very, very scared. His use of the term "Venus Syndrome" indicates the level of his apprehension and his view that we lack the political will to do what is necessary. Given that level of concern, I do not blame him for saying that we have to keep all options open, including CCS and nuclear. But, we had better do all of the other things to make sure that we don't really need those two.

A 10 Year Old on Global Warming

Thanks to LA Green Lisa Taylor, I became aware of this video, put together by a 10 year old boy and dealing with Global Warming.



After watching the posturing of some of the Senators at Dr. Chu's confirmation hearing this AM, I wonder if Niko does not understand it better than they do.

US Energy Policy is ENRON on Steroids

I have to thank Lester Brown (Plan B, 3.0) for pointing out the analogy between the US Energy Policy and ENRON. In both cases, the true costs of what we do are "off the books". In the case of ENRON, a few got very rich and then went to jail while the rest lost homes and their life savings. In the case of our energy policy we are continuing the process that will threaten life on earth, or at least life as we know it.

Perspective on War, now and in the future.

Some people are probably going to write me off for this post, but when Leon Panetta quoted this … you shall know the truth and the truth shall make your free… in his talk after being officially nominated to head the CIA, I decided that I had to write my version.

The situation in Gaza is horrendous, and we are reminded of it again and again. That is what television news does best… it show you things so graphically that the image becomes the story. We see the loss of life. We see the loss of children, a loss of so much potential, and we are horrified. Or maybe they are horrified by the show of rockets fired at Israel. But it galvanizes many to action.

So far, around 800 have died and every one is a loss. But I want you all to consider this.

There is a 90% chance that 3 billion people will have to choose between going hungry and moving their families to milder climes because of climate change within 100 years, says new research.

3 billion people is about 45% of the world's population. That massive a dislocation can not be absorbed in any manner. Consider the news we have gotten about Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe and the outbreaks of cholera. That is still going on, only no longer on television so we forget. But that will be the reality for maybe a third of the this planet.

I ask you to read The Road by Cormac McCarthy. It is perhaps the most bleak book I have ever read. But that also could be our reality.

Compared to this, why does Israel and the Palestinians waste so much time, energy, effort fighting a war that in this history of this planet is basically meaningless? There is no answer to that.

Will we have salmon in 2009?

The last two years have been a disaster for those who make their living from the sea. Fish populations, especially salmon, have plummeted. This year, the dungeness crab season might as well have never started off San Francisco. Jacoba Charles provides a good summary of the problem along with some speculations for 2009 in an article at Salon.

"This was the first time that I sat around San Francisco and wasn't out there catching wild California king salmon," says Larry Collins, one of roughly 1,500 commercial fishermen forced to spend summer on dry land.

But, there are problems with the article. Click Read more! to find out what.


Some data was left out regarding chinook salmon that spawn in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers of California. This is not to refute Charles's story, only to point out that it was not complete.

Yet the common thread in the failure of the salmon seems to be the sea. Coho and chinook salmon from up and down the coast -- not just from one river or river system -- all declined. "When you start looking at what they have in common, it is that they share the same ocean at the same time," says MacFarlane.

The unfavorable conditions weren't in 2008 and 2007 when adult salmon failed to return from the sea -- but three years earlier, when the fish were only a few months old and the ocean's food chain fell apart.

The fault, we are told, is global warming. While that is true to some extent, Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla from Restore the Delta provide a slightly different opinion in the 3rd page of comments.

This article too easily dismisses what's happened with pumping water from the Delta

While I do not doubt that climate change is beginning to alter ocean conditions, what we do not know is how many of the 2008 juvenile salmon were ground up at the massive water pumps in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta several years ago when record amounts of water were being sent to irrigate San Joaquin Valley farms. If the juvenile salmon never made it to sea, then they could not return.

Our understanding at Restore the Delta is that Klamath salmon did just fine in 2008. Why would Klamath salmon thrive in poor ocean conditions while Chinook salmon, which pass through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, perish under the same conditions?

Commercial fishermen, and environmentalists who are experts on Delta conditions, are skeptical of the climate change explanation -- and not because we do not believe that climate change is a threat to fisheries throughout the world. We just question it being used as a cover for bad environmental policies in the immediate present.

It is always better to look at all the data before writing your conclusions. It does create a problem for global warming deniers (many of which posted comments). It it wasn't global warming, then Barrigan-Parrilla must be right.

7th Generation Revisited

The first 2009 issue of my home town newspaper, the Morgan Hill Times, had another of my columns. The subject was global warming and the 7th Generation Amendment. Click Read more! to read it here.. or go to the MH Times site.



Having the opportunity to write one of the first columns of 2009 is a privilege. It gives me the mental stimulus to think seriously about what I have to accomplish during the next year. The result is something of a list of topics rather than a coherent statement, but at some level it should make sense.

I spent much of Sunday moving a pineapple guava from a location where it got neither enough sun nor water to produce good fruit. By the time I finished, I was wondering why I even started the task. But then I came in and ate some roast beef with a pineapple guava chutney and I knew why.

There is nothing quite as good as the food you grow yourself. You know it is fresh. You know it is organic. You know it was ripe when picked rather than being picked green, shipped halfway across the country and allowed to ripen enroute.

My work with the EcoAction Committee of the Green Party this year has given me the impetus to spend more time than most on some issues, such as global warming. I guess that I was naive about just how much disinformation is promulgated by those in office.

One source of much obvious mis-information is Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe who is the ranking member of the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee. He continues to proclaim that "More than 650 international scientists dissent over man-made global warming claims" even though many of the names on that list have publicly demanded that he take their names off of it.

In other words, the man has no regard for truth or ethical conduct. It is embarrassing that he should have been re-elected.

It is possible that global warming is the most serious problem facing the world today. I would certainly put it far ahead of most of what we see as news on television.

Yet, we continue to get "on one hand or on the other hand" treatment of the issue, as if facts had two hands.

We can choose to act in whatever way we can or we can choose to ignore the issue.

We don't have to deal with the consequences now … but our children and grandchildren will.

I have also become convinced, mostly by hard facts, that there is not necessary antagonism between ecological sustainability and economic sustainability.

According to a study published recently by McKinsey Global Institute, the net economic cost to stabilize our climate is near zero.

The rhetoric to the contrary is always put forward by those who would rather sell you something than fix a problem.

Having gone through all of the above; developing our orchard, investigating global warming, checking the facts on the economy, studying the water problems that California can not seem to resolve, I have become convinced that we must treat some resources as part of the commons, owned by all.

I came to know of a man named Walt Bressette. A friend of mine knew him. Walt was a leader in the Chippewa spearing rights controversy in Wisconsin. My friend found him to be " … a wise, humorous, visionary man who was able to see through political baloney and get to the heart of situations."

Walt was also the head of a committee dedicated to enacting the 7th Generation Amendment to the Constitution. It makes a lot of sense to me.

"The right of citizens of the United States to use and enjoy air, water, wildlife, and other renewable resources determined by the Congress to be common property shall not be impaired, nor shall such use impair their availability for the use of future generations."

We use the the air every day … We change it by that use and, in doing so, we endanger the very life we would pass on to our posterity. Our Constitution would "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."

Somehow, we have forgotten that the blessings of our liberty includes the land in which we live, the air we breath, the water we use.

During the coming year, members of the Green Party will work to make the 7th Generation Amendment a reality. I ask you to join us in this.

The Long Road. Part 1.

Sunday Night, the ABC World News ended with a beautiful picture of a grim future. They show us one of the most remote areas of the continental United States, Glacier National Park. I urge you to follow the link and watch this. It gives a visual reference for the impact that global warming is having on our planet, our country, right now and not in some distant future. I was ecstatic over seeing a main stream media presentation that connected my two favorite issues: global warming and water. Don't bother to read the rest until you have those images in mind.

When you are done.. click Read more! To paraphrase Paul Harvey, you will know the rest of the story.



What was not there is are even greater impacts that never make it into the mainstream media.

• Species are dying that we do not even know exist. Consider the fate of beetles that live in the extreme cold of the streams that run off the glaciers. When the glaciers dry, the beetles die.
• The mountain pine bark beetles that live through our less cold winters are capable of doing significant damage. Expect 80% of British Columbia's pine forests to be gone by 2013... that is only 5 years from now. The economic impact is staggering.
  
• California's so-called Green Governor plans to spend $ Billions that we do not have to solve a water problem with a fresh water canal through the ocean. The latest big fiasco water plan from Schwarzenegger / Feinstein plans for a 55 in sea level rise by 2100. This is what a 39 in (1 m) sea level rise will look like. That is the best farm land and fish nursery on the west coast, now under salt water and lost forever. How many $ Billions that we don't have are needed to mitigate a problem that we know is coming?

Sam Smith used the Progressive Review today to republish a segment of James Gustave Speth's piece (Global Warming and Modern Capitalism) originally in The Nation (Sept. 2008). The following can be found in both.

The never-ending drive to grow the economy undermines families, jobs, communities, the environment, a sense of place and continuity, even national security--but we are told that, in the end, we will somehow be better off. . . In affluent countries we have what might be called uneconomic growth, to borrow Herman Daly's phrase, where, if one could total up all the costs of growth, they would outweigh the benefits.

Even Science Dude at the Orange County Register says "global warming is real". We know what is coming. What are we going to do about it?

Turning 350 into policy

In my previous post today, I allowed Lorna Salzman to articulate the criticism (one with which I fully agree) that the Left has failed to take seriously the implications of ecology. However, there is some hope that a new seriousness about science will help turn the tide of public opinion on this.

I first need to call attention to a letter that Dr. James Hansen has sent to PEBO through the man he named as his Science Adviser, John Holdren. This makes very clear the fact that much of what the Democratic Party seems to be planning for 2009, an environmental policy based on bowing to the Gods of the Free Market Economy and a cap and trade mechansim, is a recipe for failure. You can read it here.

You should also read Hansen's revision to an earlier open letter he had written entitled "Tell Barack Obama the Truth."

If Greens can only do one thing in 2009, it should be to hasten the change to a policy based on ecology, one that is designed to save the earth, not destroy it.

Changing the Climate, one state at a time.

I have to thank David Robers at Gristmill for showing me this one. Consider what is happening in Illinois, we have new meaning for Think Globally, Act Locally.