|
|||
|
News and Action May 19, 2006 |
|||
|
- Buy Smilefest Tickets and Benefit The Canary Coalition The 2006 Smilefest is June 2-4 in Lake Toxaway, NC - The Disappearing Line Between Compromise and Being Co-opted an editorial by Canary Coalition Executive Director Avram Friedman - 2006 Annual Membership Meeting June 21, in Sylva, NC - The Canary Coalition Welcomes New Staff Members and Intern - Energy at the Crossroads Tour Headed to Nation's Capitol - NC IRP Hearings in Greenville and Asheville, NC May 30, June 1 - Report from AirAware, the new Canary Coalition affiliate in Indiana |
|||
|
Buy Smilefest (June 2-4) Tickets and Benefit The Canary Coalition Tickets are now available for the 2006 Smilefest at Lake Toxaway, NC. The Canary Coalition will receive a $15 kick-back for each ticket sold through our organization at the same price they are sold elsewhere: $95 for this great three-day music festival. Call toll free, 866-4CANARY (866-422-6279) or email. |
|||
|
The Disappearing Line Between Compromise and Being Co-opted by Avram Friedman
In January of 2006, Jim Hansen, a climatologist advising the Bush Administration said that we have “at most ten years” to make the drastic cuts in emissions that might head off climatic catastrophe. Hansen was speaking to just one major threat to our existence on earth, as we know it. Likewise, the continued use of fossil fuels and nuclear technology poses the threat of other disastrous consequences, as acid rain, excess nitrogen deposition, mercury contamination and radioactive materials saturate the environment and endanger public health for generations to come.
With the emerging general cognizance of impending global catastrophe, a new sense of urgency should be gripping active members of the environmental community and with it a new type of strategy involving new techniques of influence should be evolving to match the accelerated need. The cumbersome process of negligible incremental progress followed by regress and then, hopefully, another small step forward, can no longer be the mode of operation to which we acquiesce. There is simply not enough time.
Compromise is a time-honored method of achieving incremental progress. But, while compromise is sometimes necessary when confronted with conflicting needs and interests, it should never be viewed as a goal in itself by the environmental community. Compromise should not be used as an escape hatch to avoid intimidation, appease greedy corporations, or to express "friendship in a spirit of cooperation" with those whose interests differ from the public interest. We have no right to compromise the lives of our children in order to avoid a difficult political struggle. The political atmosphere within which we find ourselves is filled with subtle intimidations, misleading information, pseudo solutions and political pitfalls that can easily divert our attention from the substantive changes that have to occur in the very near future if we truly intend to avoid a major global upheaval. The laws of physics cannot be compromised. Either we are going to save the planet or we are not.
Without malice or blame and without singling out or naming organizations, but with the intent of constructive criticism, I have to report that at least part of the "established" environmental community in North Carolina and elsewhere appears to be moving toward a path of diversion, through a process I can only describe as co-option. I sincerely hope this can be absorbed in the positive spirit in which it is intended by people who feel targeted by this statement, but regardless, these thoughts need to be spoken and I am prepared to let the chips fall where they may.
Co-option is not a new political phenomena. It's a pitfall that all movements have had to confront throughout the history of political reform. Individuals and organizations struggle to learn the ropes of the system. They familiarize themselves with the process and with key players in powerful positions, as they must. The difficulty arises when a certain measure of success is achieved, when the reformers begin to feel too comfortable and begin to identify with the process and those they are attempting to influence. Relationships and friendships develop blurring the inherent roles between the parties involved, and without realizing it they become part of the system that is perpetuating the problem.
Almost all environmental organizations began as basic grassroots ventures with noble intentions and admirable dedication toward the ideals dictated by ecological science and of bringing human habitation more into line with the symbiotic patterns of nature. Some have now grown into powerful, influential institutions with teams of lawyers, lobbyists, and media experts. On the one hand, this is necessary. We need this type of power to compete with the powerful interests that are our inherent opponents. But, on the other hand there is a dangerous pitfall that accompanies this power. The leading operatives in these organizations can easily lose touch with the grassroots and begin to identify more with those working on the same level of the political process as they. Original goals and missions can be left behind in an effort to maintain social credibility within the circles of acquaintances they now frequent. It requires a conscious effort to maintain an ethical separation between the advocate and government agencies and/or inherently adversarial interests. That line is easily crossed, sometimes without realization.
Examples of this co-option process are, unfortunately, becoming more frequent within the established environmental community at a time when we can least afford to divert from real and substantive solutions. For example, acting independently and without regard to their grassroots constituencies, some organizational spokespeople are lending credibility to nuclear power as a viable alternative to fossil fuel-burning, helping to perpetuate the myth that the nuclear industry produces no greenhouse gas emissions and is therefore preferable as a future energy choice, despite the unsolvable problems of nuclear waste transportation and storage, the irreversible consequences of plutonium dust entering our biosphere, the proliferation of nuclear weapons made more inevitable by the extended use of this technology, the increased possibility of more and greater Chernobyl or Three-Mile-Island-type accidents with the addition of hundreds of new power plants throughout the country, or the fact that nuclear energy would not be economically viable without heavy government subsidies. Others are lending their names and the credibility of their organizations to promote the technology of coal gasification, misleading the public into believing that there is such a thing as "clean coal", despite the horrible environmental and social consequences wrought by mountaintop removal coal mining and the vast national sacrifice areas being created in West Virginia, Kentucky and elsewhere by that process.
We are in danger of having sanctioned, "company" environmental organizations, similar to "company" unions that were formed by corporations to divert the development of real unions during the heydays of the labor movement. These are groups that avail political figures with compromised or meaningless, yet sanctioned positions they can adopt on environmental issues providing the appearance of progressive movement, but having little substance. These sanctioned organizations are given credence by the news media and treated as if they alone represent the environmental community. So, now, according to the NY Times, the "environmental community" is beginning to "warm" toward the idea of nuclear power to meet future energy demands to combat global warming. Likewise, In North Carolina, state legislators dismiss a grassroots effort to pass a Disapproval Bill against the weakening of NSR regulations because "the environmental community" reached a compromise with industry. Halfway measures addressing important issues are arrived at through "compromise" by the sanctioned groups, and then dropped, providing the appearance that the problem has been solved, diverting public attention as the problem continues to fester. Enforcement of existing laws and regulations is ignored and, because the sanctioned organizations don't find it glamorous enough to raise a fuss, the issue is ignored by the news media, legislators and the public.
Co-option can be insidious in its subtlety while it is devastating in slowing real progress. For instance, while public utility "front" people are conversing with representatives of sanctioned environmental organizations, making trivial concessions and giving lip service to environmental concepts for public consumption, the bulk of the power industry's legal and financial machines are busy laying the groundwork for a new generation of coal and nuclear plants throughout the southeast with total abandon to health and environmental consequences. Some of the long established environmental leadership has "grown" into the concept that it is only through cooperation with industrial interests that progress can be made. A frequently repeated concept heard within environmental circles these days is that we have to find a way to make energy efficiency profitable for power companies. Only then, it is thought, will efficiency measures stand a chance for success. "We have to work with industry to achieve gain."
There is, undeniably, some room to work with industry for gain. For instance, circumstances almost miraculously came together to make it profitable for the power industry to cooperate with the environmental community in producing the NC Clean Smokestacks Act. Likewise, there are industrial corporations throughout the world discovering that increased energy efficiency can mean considerably increased profit margins. But, that's not always going to happen and the environmental movement can't limit itself to progress that can be obtained only through chance circumstances that allow deep cooperation with industrial interests. Cooperation with industry will work only within the narrow realm of possibilities that allow environmental progress to be accompanied by financial benefit to industry. But, beyond that realm there is the vast territory in which corporate interests diverge from the public interest, where changes will have to materialize despite the fact that they don't bring increased corporate profit or may even bring profit losses (may I not be hanged for heresy).
It is at this point that the environmental community has to be able to maintain its integrity and identity as a completely separate entity with clearly defined goals that differentiate its interests from both industry and government agencies and entities. This separation has to be so complete that the environmental community retains the moral and ethical ability to turn around and do battle on all legal and political fronts to achieve its goals, regardless of who may be offended or how powerful its inherent opponents may seem. The environmental community can never lose sight of the fact that, while there are occasions when interests may intersect, polluting industries, and in particular the electric power industry are inherent opponents at the present time. The electric power industry is in the business of selling energy and it is in its interest for people and industry to use and buy more energy. Those who lose sight of this basic fact are naive and being misled in a direction that wastes the time, effort and limited resources of those working for real progress toward energy efficiency, conservation and a transformation to a renewable energy economy. In addition, the power industry is terminally intertwined with the coal industry and the nuclear industry, with the federal bureaucracy that is promoting its proliferation in conjunction with the DOE and its nuclear weapons production program. How easy it is to ignore this relationship, go into a state of denial and pretend that real, substantial progress can be made if we simply enter into a cooperative relationship with industry, in effect, succumbing to the intimidation of the enormity of the power of our inherent opponents, and settle for whatever scraps of perceived progress we can salvage through weak compromise, as political and economic confrontation is avoided at all cost.
Friends, we don't have time for this. Compromise has had its place and served its purpose in germinating and growing the environmental movement into its current mainstream status. But it's time to get back to the roots, the grassroots, of the environmental movement and move forward as a force to be reckoned with. Lets stop for a minute to realize that a great majority of people in this country now consider themselves to be environmentalists. The potential of our movement has changed in our favor and so the dynamics of our actions need to change to take full advantage of this new status. It's time to cash in our political chips and assert the power that is represented by the majority of the people, the scientific community, the medical community, and virtually every segment of our society including, more and more, the religious community. We have to quickly move past the mode of compromise and into the mode of creating a firm platform, that will in actuality meet the needs, based on scientific reasoning, of a step by step program that will save the planet. We need to stand by that platform without compromise and battle our opponents through every political, legal, judicial and non-violent way possible, perhaps including civil disobedience, if necessary, to achieve every aspect of that program. We are the majority. We no longer ask for favors from politicians. Our support has enormous political value. Politicians must seek our support and we must not give it away lightly or cheaply. Whatever has to be done to preserve an inhabitable world for future generations, that's what we have to do. There is no compromise with scientific data. Compromise is meaningless and detrimental if it doesn't get us all the way to where we need to be in time to make a difference.
The North Carolina compromise on the PSD/NSR revision last year was a weak and unnecessary gesture, sending up a red flag to warn those environmental groups involved that they are dangerously close to being co-opted by the process into a meaninglessness that is preventing real progress on air quality and other environmental issues. The message sent to legislators and to the irresponsible state enforcement agencies who revised the rule, is that the environmental community is too weak and timid to stand up to industrial intimidation. This was a compromise not sanctioned by the grassroots constituencies of any environmental organization in the state. It was a deal struck between industry, government regulators and a few individuals who are being sanctioned by legislators and the news media as "the representatives of the environmental community", although they hold no actual authority as such and are unrepresentative of grassroots sentiment on such compromise.
There is no time and no reason to move backwards on air quality issues, not one iota. Nothing like the PSD compromise need ever happen again. It's time to put our collective foot down and assert our power by facing off against those who would move backwards and stand in the way of the rapid progress that needs to materialize. The sooner we exhibit our political strength the better, to permanently change the political dynamics in North Carolina and nationwide, and move relentlessly toward real solutions and dramatic progress within the political system.
We have power. We have to realize that and learn how to use it. Quickly.
If
a Bill of Disapproval is not passed in the NC State Legislature in the 2006
session, the revised, weakened PSD/NSR rule will come into effect allowing
the perpetuation of grandfather exemptions from modern emission control
system requirements for old and dirty power plants, factories and
refineries. If you live in North Carolina write your state legislators and
demand they support and sponsor a Disapproval
Bill of 15A NCAC 02D .0530, the revised PSD/NSR rule. |
|||
|
2006 Annual Membership Meeting June 21, in Sylva, NC On Wednesday, June 21, 7pm, the Canary Coalition will hold its 2006 annual membership meeting in the Sylva, NC office meeting room. Ballots will be counted to elect five Board members. The annual report will be reviewed. Look for your ballot in the mail and be sure to send it in as quickly as possible prior to the meeting. |
|||
|
The Canary Coalition Welcomes New Staff Members and Intern We'd like to welcome several recent additions to the Canary Coalition team this month. Mike Cherin has begun working for us on membership expansion in the field . Mike has a long, successful history within the environmental community and his efforts will broaden our geographical presence as well as the size of our membership. Mark Ginsberg has begun working on a part-time basis for us in the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill area, performing varying tasks involving community organizing, lobbying and fundraising. His work greatly helped in the success of the Raleigh stop of the Energy at the Crossroads Tour. Finally, Kok Yew Lee has begun working in our Sylva office as a full-time intern for the duration of the summer. He is with us courtesy of the Duke University-Stanback intern scholarship program and he'll be focusing on a research project to demonstrate how the consequences of air pollution are costing jobs throughout North Carolina. |
|||
|
On Saturday, June 10, the Canary Coalition will be continuing its series of field trips to the Buffalo Mountain, Tennessee wind farm in conjunction with TVA. For the past 3 years we have been bringing legislators, local government officials, members of the press and other community leaders to view this state-of-the-art wind facility in an effort to dispel negative myths about large wind turbines and demonstrate the viability of wind as a safe, clean and economical alternative to more polluting technologies to help supply our future energy needs. North Carolina has vast wind energy potential in the mountains and on the coast. This effort has only become more urgent as power companies throughout the southeast and elsewhere have begun to apply for permits to construct and operate a new generation of coal and nuclear power plants. If you'd like to join this field trip please call 828-631-3447 or email us and we'll send more details. |
|||
|
Energy at the Crossroads Tour Headed to Nation's Capitol After three successful stops in North Carolina, the Energy at the Crossroads Tour is headed to Baltimore, Annapolis and Washington DC, July 6,7 and 9 respectively. In response to the application for permits to build new coal and nuclear plants throughout the southeast, the Canary Coalition, NIRS and SEEEXPO have coordinated this campaign to inform and involve the public in creating an energy future based on energy efficiency, conservation and safe, clean, economical renewable energy technologies such as wind, solar and methane gas recovery from landfills. The three stops in North Carolina produced television coverage on ABC and CNN local affiliates as well as Time-Warner's statewide NC-14 cable TV. The Raleigh forum also attracted Adam Hocksberg of National Public Radio who is doing a story on the Tour that will be aired nationally on All Things Considered. The Energy Future Resolution, the core message of the Tour, has now been introduced, in a modified form, to the North Carolina state legislature as the NC Energy Security Bill. Dozens of organizations have participated in the first three Tour stops and the issue of new power plant application permits and their alternatives has seemingly exploded in the State Capitol and in activist circles throughout the state. And we're just getting started. |
|||
|
NC IRP Hearings in Greenville and Asheville, May 30, June 1 The North Carolina Utilities
Commission has decided to hold two additional public hearings on its
Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) after an overwhelming crowd of more than 100
people signed up to speak at the hearing in Raleigh on May 1. The
additional hearings will be in Greenville (eastern North Carolina) on
Tuesday, May 30 and in Asheville (western NC) on Thursday June 1. The
Asheville hearing will be at 7pm at the Buncombe County Courthouse, District
Courtroom #1, 60 Court Plaza. No place and time have yet been publicized for
the Greenville meeting. It's very important that we have a good turnout at these hearings and that the Utilities Commission hears strong public opposition to the construction of new coal and nuclear power plants, as well as support for strong energy efficiency and conservation measures and reliance on safe, clean renewable resources such as wind and solar energy. At the Raleigh hearing commission members seemed very interested in personal accounts describing methods of saving energy in residences and business, through new construction and efficiency methods. They didn't seem to want to hear about opposition to new power plant construction, but they need to hear it loudly and clearly, so make sure to include that in your comments. View the Canary Coalition May 1 statement. The North Carolina Sustainable Energy Association (NCSEA) has sent out these important points to refer to in making written or verbal comments to the Utilities Commission in relation to the IRP: Ten Information Points for your reference and use
I. Validity of utility load forecasting methods. These forecasts determine whether and when utilities construct
new power plants and transmission wires. They also influence utility decisions to buy electricity from, or sell
electricity to, other areas; amount of customer education necessary, and financial incentives employed by the Companies, to encourage
customer energy efficiency measures; and
|
|||
|
Report from AirAware, the new Canary Coalition affiliate in Indiana In the past few months, Airaware members have written
letters and rallied others to write to the EPA regarding strengthening the standards for fine and
coarse particulates. This is a key issue in our area because of all of the power plants in such a small
radius--17 plants in a 62 mile radius with more to come in the future. Another focus has been on
monitoring in the area for particulate matter. One of our members, Jean Webb, wrote
an excellent article in |
|||
|
If you have not already done so, please renew your annual membership with the CanaryCoalition and help keep the database updated with your most recent contact information. There is no annual membership fee, although all donations are gratefully accepted (and very much needed). All new and renewing members receive the interactive membership computer CD. The membership CD is a powerful tool that aids its owner in being a clean-air activist. It contains a 15-minute PowerPoint presentation about air quality issues and the Canary Coalition that can be shown to friends, groups, classrooms, etc. Also on the membership CD is a library of documents containing information about important air quality issues. There are also graphics for iron-on applications, printable membership forms and a link to the Canary Coalition website. For donations of $35 or more tee-shirts are available upon request. Send contact information and donations to: The Canary Coalition PO Box 653 Sylva, NC 28779
or you can donate online |
|||
