WWF's Canadian Living Planet Report

Canada may possess some of the most expansive wilderness on the planet, but Canadians are amongst the world's biggest consumers of resources. According to the WWF’s Living Planet Report, if everyone on Earth consumed resources at the same rate as Canadians, it would take four Earths to meet Canada's demand.

According to the report, Canada has the 7th largest ecological footprint, which is two and half times the global average. Canada also has the 16th largest water footprint! More than half of Canada’s total footprint is a result of their carbon footprint, mostly from fossil fuel use.

The report recommended that Canadian businesses need to implement sustainability policies and practices. Canadians must also demand that their governments increase energy efficiency standards. All Canadians need to play their part in reducing Canada's massive footprint.


Related Posts
Canada's Conservatives at Odds with the Public on Climate Change
Green Market Opportunity Being Missed by Canada
Why Canadian Environment Minister Resigned
Canada is a World Leader in GHG Emissions
World Urges Canada to Do More on Climate Change
Conservatives Ignore Canadians While Jeopardizing the Environment
Copenhagen Accord: Canada to Reduce its GHG Emissions
The Impact of a Climate Change Deal on Canada
Why Canadian Conservatives Must Make Concessions on Climate Change
Canada Makes Dramatic Shift on Climate Change Management Policy
Program and Plans for G8 and G20 Summits in Canada
Obama's Visit to Canada
Conservative Budget: No Green for Canada
Canada Votes: Environmental Politics
Green Policy Debated in Canadian Parliament
The Montreal Protocol Celebrates 23rd Birthday
Montreal 2010 World Energy Congress
Canada and 350.org's 10/10/10 Event
Canada's Most Sustainable Businesses
Canadian Municipal Green Incentives
Government Energy Policy the Environment and the Economy
A Sustainable World Order

Canada's Conservative Government at Odds with the Public on Climate Change

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservative government have a deplorable environmental record. It is believed to be one of the factors behind the failure of Canada's bid to secure a seat on the United Nations Security Council.

Although Canada has a massive footprint, the ruling Conservatives are avoiding action on climate change. In a political strategy that would make American Republicans proud, Harper's Conservative government has managed to do nothing to reduce Canada's contribution to climate change.

Most recently, Canada's Conservatives defeated a climate change bill that had passed in the House of Commons last year. The bill called for 25% cuts in the country's CO2 emissions below 1990 levels. Conservatives in Canada's non-elected Senate killed the motion, which was backed by opposition parties, in a vote on November 14th, just 13 days before COP16, the UN climate change summit in Cancun, Mexico.

Even before the most recent climate insult, the Canadian government was the target of a great deal of criticism on the climate change front. Canada's record on the environment is so poor they were repeatedly singled out for the dubious 'Fossil of the Day' distinction during last year's COP15 climate change conference in Copenhagen.

In February 2010, the Guardian unearthed a leaked document from a Chinese think tank that condemned Canada for being "devoted to conniving" at COP15. According to The Guardian, the Chinese text says that Canada spent the conference trying, "to convince the world that its pledge of a 3% emissions reduction between 1990 and 2020 is significant, while having no intention of meeting its Kyoto protocol target of 6%."

Canada has indeed abandoned its Kyoto commitments and the CBC reported that the Conservatives have no plan to reach the 3% target (20% below 2006) that they had promised.

The government's view is at odds with Canadians. According to one poll, Canadians believe climate change poses a significantly bigger threat to the “vital interests” of the nation over the next decade than international terrorism.

While nearly half of those surveyed said climate change is a “critical threat,” only about one in four people said the same about international terrorism. A similar poll conducted in 2004 showed Canadians believed the two threats were about equal.

A more recent poll indicated that 70 percent of Canadians said they would somewhat support or strongly support government action to reduce oil subsidies in Canada, estimated to cost taxpayers about $2 billion per year.

In a separate question, 65 percent of respondents said they opposed the Harper government's strategy of waiting for the US and other nations ''to develop their plans for climate change before it implements further measures to address climate change."

A new poll confirms that the Harper government is indeed out of step with Canadians. The poll indicates that the Canadian public has far different priorities than the government when it comes to climate change.

Over 80 percent of Canadians believe the Canadian government should invest in “green jobs” and transition programs for workers and communities negatively affected by a shift off of fossil fuels.

It is ironic that in 2007 Stephen Harper called climate change, “perhaps the biggest threat to confront the future of humanity today.” As 2010 draws to a close, Canadians are indicating that they want action on climate change, yet Harper's Conservatives appear content to do nothing.

Related Posts
WWF's Canadian Living Planet Report
Green Market Opportunity Being Missed by Canada
Why Canadian Environment Minister Resigned
Canada is a World Leader in GHG Emissions
World Urges Canada to Do More on Climate Change
Conservatives Ignore Canadians While Jeopardizing the Environment
Copenhagen Accord: Canada to Reduce its GHG Emissions
The Impact of a Climate Change Deal on Canada
Why Canadian Conservatives Must Make Concessions on Climate Change
Canada Makes Dramatic Shift on Climate Change Management Policy
Program and Plans for G8 and G20 Summits in Canada
Obama's Visit to Canada
Conservative Budget: No Green for Canada
Canada Votes: Environmental Politics
Green Policy Debated in Canadian Parliament
The Montreal Protocol Celebrates 23rd Birthday
Montreal 2010 World Energy Congress
Canada and 350.org's 10/10/10 Event
Canada's Most Sustainable Businesses
Canadian Municipal Green Incentives
Government Energy Policy the Environment and the Economy
A Sustainable World Order

Why Canadian Environment Minister Resigned

Many theories are circulating as to why Jim Prentice, Canada's Federal environment minister, abandoned the Conservatives for a senior position with a major bank.

Prentice resigned from cabinet in early November to take the position of vice-chairman and senior executive vice-president at the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC). He officially resigned his seat as MP for the riding of Calgary Centre-North in mid November, paving the way for a by-election that could come as quickly as early January.

Prentice has said things like,"The science overall is relatively clear on all of this and as a conservationist and as a responsible environmental steward Canada wants to see carbon emissions reduced." But he was criticized for being neither preservationist nor environmentally responsible.

Prentice’s resignation from cabinet came two days after he announced that the federal government had rejected Taseko Mines’ Prosperity gold-copper project, near Williams Lake, due to the “significant adverse environmental effects.” Some have suggested that this move helps to shore up his environmental credentials and sets up a leadership bid at some point in the future.

Some of his harshest critics have suggested that Prentice's position at the CIBC is a reward for the fact that he has been very good to the oil and gas industries. Prentice will make $5M per year plus benefits at CIBC.

Publicly, he said "it is time for me to pursue new opportunities outside of public life." However, there are other reasons, Prentice has taken a beating from environmentalists, especially during the high profile, COP15 climate-change summit in Copenhagen last year. Environmental activists railed against Prentice during the conference, repeatedly bestowing Canada with the dubious 'Fossil of the Day' distinction.

One of Mr Prentice's collegues in Parliament is Bloc Quebecois MP Pierre Paquette, he described Prentice as, "a very bad minister for environmental issues."

Although better than many Conservatives who have managed this portfolio, Prentice's legacy as environment minister is mixed. He led progress on protected areas, toxic substances, and water quality for First Nations, but he also helped Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper support the environmentally destructive tar sands.

In fairness, there is not much room to work as an environment minister under this Conservative government.

Prentice may be thinking of his own leadership aspirations. Privately, he had been telling people that he didn't expect to be very busy for the next two years. This is due to the fact that Prime Minister Harper takes a continental approach to climate change, any national action on reducing greenhouse gas emissions is tied to reductions in the US. In the wake of recent Republican victories in US midterm elections, movement on climate change has been effectively stymied for at least two years.

It is with good reason that Prentice abandoned a powerless portfolio and distanced himself from the Harper government's deplorable environmental record. Prentice was at the helm of a ministry whose biggest file had effectively been shelved. With the rest of the world increasingly turning to sustainable growth and green jobs, Prentice may have seen the writing on the wall and he may have left before Canadians vote for change.


Related Posts
Canada's Conservative Government at Odds with the Public on Climate Change
Green Market Opportunity Being Missed by Canada
WWF's Canadian Living Planet Report
Canada is a World Leader in GHG Emissions
World Urges Canada to Do More on Climate Change
Conservatives Ignore Canadians While Jeopardizing the Environment
Copenhagen Accord: Canada to Reduce its GHG Emissions
The Impact of a Climate Change Deal on Canada
Why Canadian Conservatives Must Make Concessions on Climate Change
Canada Makes Dramatic Shift on Climate Change Management Policy
Program and Plans for G8 and G20 Summits in Canada
Obama's Visit to Canada
Conservative Budget: No Green for Canada
Canada Votes: Environmental Politics
Green Policy Debated in Canadian Parliament
The Montreal Protocol Celebrates 23rd Birthday
Montreal 2010 World Energy Congress
Canada and 350.org's 10/10/10 Event
Canada's Most Sustainable Businesses
Canadian Municipal Green Incentives
Government Energy Policy the Environment and the Economy
A Sustainable World Order

The G20 and the Transition to a Greener Economy

The G20 has a pivotal role to play in support of the development of a more sustainable economy. This entails sustainable green growth powered by clean technologies and respect for nature's biodiversity.

Already some international efforts are underway. The World Bank, in partnership with organizations including UNEP, will be assisting developing countries with national, green accounts. But there are still major obstacles that need to be overcome, not the least of which is subsidies for the oil industries and certain fisheries. Subsidies use tax dollars that cause global warming and depletion of dwindling fish stocks.

Global subsidies that contribute to climate change total up to $800 billion and over $27 billion goes to fishing subsidies.We need to do more than address the contradictions inherent in existing economic models, public policy and private sector investments must be aligned in ways that meet the short-term recovery challenges with a longer-term vision of opportunity.

A year ago in London, G-20 leaders articulated a vision of an “inclusive, sustainable and green recovery.” By acting in concert and working cooperatively, the G20 can play a central role in making the transition to a low carbon economy.


Related Posts

The G20 and the Green Economy

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
Spain Renews its Commitment to Clean Energy at the G20

UN Hopeful about G20 Climate Finance
Greenpeace's G20 Checklist
Video on Green Growth - Korea's Key to a Better Future
Korea's Green Growth and the New Expanison Paradigm
UN Chief Asks G20 to Focus on a Sustainable Recovery
G20 Summit in Toronto Ends with Little Action on Climate Change
G20 Must Cooperate for a Sustainable Recovery
G20 and Central Bank Governors Joint Communique
G20 Disagreements and Global Economic Reforms
Program and Plans for G8 and G20 Summits in Canada
UN Climate Change Initiatives Post Toronto
G20 Security Concerns Force Cancellation of Sustainable Supply Chain Event

G20 Protestors Dilute Green Message
Canadians Disappointed with Conservative's Lack of leadership at the Toronto G20 Summit
The G20 and the Developing World Disagree on Proposed Climate Change Protocols

Competing National Priorities
End Fossil Fuel Subsidies
Local Business Promotes Green Agenda for G20 in Pittsburgh
G20 Lays the Foundation for a Better World
Global Warming Exposes Resources but Arctic Meeting Leaves Some Out in the Cold
G8's More Aggressive GHG Targets

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity

A comprehensive study known as The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) provides compelling evidence for sustainable development. This assessment was requested by G8 finance ministers, it illustrates the economic value nature's diversity.

TEEB consists of a series of reports for distinct end-users including ecologists and economists, policy makers, local governments, business and citizens.

The TEEB study is a major international initiative to draw attention to the global economic benefits of biodiversity, to highlight the growing costs of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation, and to draw together expertise from the fields of science, economics and policy to enable practical actions moving forward.

The research calculated the global, multitrillion dollar losses due to the loss of biodiversity, while highlighting massive returns, including green jobs, from investments in natural systems.

Brazil and India, are amongst the countries that have announced that they will be carrying out similar country-level TEEB studies. Japan and the EU have also signaled interest, as has the Asian Development Bank for a continent wide assessment. This is an important first step toward factoring and mainstreaming the economics of nature into policy making.

Thanks to TWEEB, there is a growing pool of quantatative data on the economic importance of maintaining nature’s multitrillion dollar contribution to our economy.


Related Posts
Clean Tech Job Trends 2010 Report: Growth and Global Competition
Clean Tech Job Trends 2010 Report: Manufacturing and Recommendations
Red States and Green Consumers
Democrats the Environment and Green Jobs
Consumer Demand for Green
Climate Scientist Cleared: Deniers Deprived of Misinformation Strategy
The Dangerous Diversion of Climategate
Debunking CO2 Myths and The Science of Climate Change

Spain Renews its Commitment to Clean Energy at the G20 Conference

Spain is already a leader in clean energy and they are looking to green to grow their economy and provide jobs. Spain also acknowledges the need for reforms in markets driving the energy sector in order to help expand the green economy.

Ahead of the recent G20 conference in Seoul, Korea, European Commission President Jose Barroso said the G20 must remain committed to a sustainable green economy. In a statement he said, "The G20 must not waiver in their efforts to come to a more sustainable management of our resources and a greener economy,"

"Subsidies for fossil fuels must be gradually withdrawn," said Barroso. "We also must continue our efforts to reduce the price volatility of oil and other commodities," he added.

The Spanish Prime Minister, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, said the green economy will help to address high unemployment in Spain. Zapatero indicated that ecologically sustainable industries could produce around a million jobs in the country over the next decade and help the country climb out of the economic crisis.

"The green economy represents a great potential to generate employment in the future and also to help with technological advances and to make economies more competitive," Zapatero said on the Spanish television network RTVE.

Spain has ambitious yet realistic goals including doubling the amount of freight that travels by rail in the next 10 years. Spain also aims to have 250,000 electrically powered cars on its roads by 2015.

At the G20 conference, Zapatero highlighted Spain's dedication to renewable energy and indicated that his country has set a new record by having 70 percent of its energy needs being supplied by clean sources, including wind and solar.

Zapatero also stressed that leading economies need to work towards market reforms as the world prepares for COP16 scheduled for the end of November in Cancun, Mexico. Spain is leading the way through sustainable economic growth and green jobs.


Related Posts
The G20 and the Transition to a Greener Economy
The G20 and the Green Economy
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
UN Hopeful about G20 Climate Finance
Greenpeace's G20 Checklist
Video on Green Growth - Korea's Key to a Better Future
Korea's Green Growth and the New Expanison Paradigm
UN Chief Asks G20 to Focus on a Sustainable Recovery
G20 Summit in Toronto Ends with Little Action on Climate Change
G20 Must Cooperate for a Sustainable Recovery
G20 and Central Bank Governors Joint Communique
G20 Disagreements and Global Economic Reforms
Program and Plans for G8 and G20 Summits in Canada
UN Climate Change Initiatives Post Toronto
G20 Security Concerns Force Cancellation of Sustainable Supply Chain Event
G20 Protestors Dilute Green Message
Canadians Disappointed with Conservative's Lack of leadership at the Toronto G20 Summit
The G20 and the Developing World Disagree on Proposed Climate Change Protocols
Competing National Priorities
End Fossil Fuel Subsidies
Local Business Promotes Green Agenda for G20 in Pittsburgh
G20 Lays the Foundation for a Better World
Global Warming Exposes Resources but Arctic Meeting Leaves Some Out in the Cold
G8's More Aggressive GHG Targets

Greenpeace's G20 Checklist

Greenpeace International was hoping that the G20 leaders meeting in Seoul would honor the promises they made a year ago on climate action and begin cutting fossil fuel subsidies and helping the world to ramp-up the green economy.

In a recent statement, Patricia Lerner, Greenpeace International Senior Political Adviser said, 'This G20 (meeting) is supposed to give a strong signal of support for the upcoming climate talks in Cancun (Mexico), but instead we understand there are moves afoot to backtrack on commitments made a year ago."

Greenpeace issued a G20 checklist that including honouring their promises on climate, closing the gap between industrialised country emission reduction commitments and what the climate science demands. Leaders must also create the financial and regulatory conditions that incentivise a green economy, and agree on the indicators and reporting mechanisms needed to monitor progress.

Another key issue committed to by G20 leaders in Pittsburgh last year and reported on in Toronto earlier this year was the phase-out of subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. A Greenpeace report, written by the Global Subsidies Initiative, reveals a lack of transparency around fossil fuel subsidies. The review recommends that the focus should be on a much wider range of issues than merely revenue maximization.

Greenpeace also called on G20 leaders to invest in climate finance, switch to clean energy and stop deforestation. 'These governments have a choice: They can lead the world to a clean energy future, safe from the ravages of climate change' or they can continue to subsidise the oil industry and accept the human and economic consequences of dangerous climate change,' Lerner said.


Related Posts
The G20 and the Transition to a Greener Economy
The G20 and the Green Economy
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
Spain Renews its Commitment to Clean Energy at the G20
UN Hopeful about G20 Climate Finance
Video on Green Growth - Korea's Key to a Better Future
Korea's Green Growth and the New Expanison Paradigm
UN Chief Asks G20 to Focus on a Sustainable Recovery
G20 Summit in Toronto Ends with Little Action on Climate Change
G20 Must Cooperate for a Sustainable Recovery
G20 and Central Bank Governors Joint Communique
G20 Disagreements and Global Economic Reforms
Program and Plans for G8 and G20 Summits in Canada
UN Climate Change Initiatives Post Toronto
G20 Security Concerns Force Cancellation of Sustainable Supply Chain Event
G20 Protestors Dilute Green Message
Canadians Disappointed with Conservative's Lack of leadership at the Toronto G20 Summit
The G20 and the Developing World Disagree on Proposed Climate Change Protocols
Competing National Priorities
End Fossil Fuel Subsidies
Local Business Promotes Green Agenda for G20 in Pittsburgh
G20 Lays the Foundation for a Better World
Global Warming Exposes Resources but Arctic Meeting Leaves Some Out in the Cold
G8's More Aggressive GHG Targets

Korea's Green Growth and the New Expanison Paradigm

At the recent G20 meetings in Seoul, Korea put green on the the business summit agenda. The world wide recession propelled the global economy in a new direction, forcing many countries around the world to follow a new green expansion paradigm.

For sustainable and balanced development, governments are increasingly aware of the fact that green growth is the future of economic development.

In an interview with The Korea Times, Young Soo-gil, chairman of the Presidential Committee on Green Growth said, “The agenda for the summit will be crowded with other issues of pressing priorities to allow much discussion on green growth. The Korean G20 Summit Preparatory Committee is aiming for mainstream advancement on the agenda for the summit, and so ‘development’ will be a prominent theme.”

“This will hopefully allow President Lee Myung-bak to bring the attention of the G20 Leaders to the value of the theme of green growth as a catalyst for global cooperation in many development dimensions,” he added.

Young said that Korea is seeking to take a lead in the global green growth drive by sharing its knowledge and experience.

“Korea would like to help those developing countries harmonize their growth aspirations with the environmental ones by sharing its green growth tool kits and experiences, as well as by working together to undertake specific mitigation and adaptation projects in cost-effective and growth-friendly ways in individual countries,” he said.

“Korea is also willing to take leadership in the international efforts to help build physical infrastructures in the developing countries in climate-change resilient ways. For these purposes, Korea is to make green growth partnership a leading component of its increased ODA (Official Development Assistance) commitment as a new member of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC),” he added.

As part of this effort, Korea has launched the East Asia Climate Partnership (EACP). Most significantly, on July 16 of this year, the Korean government launched a Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI) based in Seoul.

“Korea hopes to develop GGGI into an international treaty-based institution by 2012 with support from other countries which share belief in the value of green growth as well as of sharing insights, know-how and experiences on it,” he said.

“The Green Growth Committee also hopes that Korea’s green growth inspirations will play a facilitating role in making a breakthrough over the issue of how to reconcile economic, social and environmental development objectives at the Rio plus 20 Conference on Sustainable Development to be held in 2012,” he added.

Related Posts
Video on Green Growth - Korea's Key to a Better Future
Green Stimulus: Global Green New Deal
Business for the Environment Global Summit
Korean (Hyundai & Kia) Greener Cars
Small Business, Green Technology and Creativity
UN Climate Change Initiatives Post Toronto
The Green Job Market
Global Cooperation Ahead of COP 15
The Way Forward
Clean Tech Job Trends 2010 Report: Growth and Global Competition
Clean Tech Job Trends 2010 Report: Manufacturing Issues and Recommendations
China's Green Stimulus, US/China Cooperation and Economic Recovery

Video on Green Growth - Korea's Key to a Better Future

With the recent G20 summit held in Seoul, Korea is taking the opportunity to show its leadership in the development of the green economy. This 6 minute video reviews green growth generally and then zeros in on Korea's efforts. The video contains a great introduction on green growth and the need for transnational wisdom.

The Presidential Committee on Green Growth of Korea announced on May 13 that the Korean government will invest about 12 trillion won (roughly US $9.5 billion) by 2013 in the development of green technology as part of the "Green New Deal" announced earlier this year.

Since his inauguration, President Lee Myung-bak has put green growth on top of the country's agenda. He has stressed the importance of the development of environment-friendly technologies that will boost Korea's economic competitiveness.

Related Posts
Korea's Green Growth and the New Expanison Paradigm
Green Stimulus: Global Green New Deal
Business for the Environment Global Summit
Korean (Hyundai & Kia) Greener Cars
Small Business, Green Technology and Creativity
UN Climate Change Initiatives Post Toronto
The Green Job Market
Global Cooperation Ahead of COP 15
The Way Forward
Clean Tech Job Trends 2010 Report: Growth and Global Competition
Clean Tech Job Trends 2010 Report: Manufacturing Issues and Recommendations
China's Green Stimulus, US/China Cooperation and Economic Recovery

UN Hopeful about G20 Climate Finance

The Seoul G20 summit ended on 12 November, 2010. On November 9, Achim Steiner, the UN Undersecretary General and Executive Director of UNEP, wrote about the important role the G20 can play 'embedding a fundamental transition to a more sustainable global economy that looks beyond the current, narrow definition of wealth and GDP.'

The G20 has acted to stabilize banks and to counter the financial and economic crisis. Steiner hoped that the G20 meeting in Seoul could have been 'a watershed in international financial and economic affairs, where the pledge, made at the G20 in London, toward a green and more sustainable recovery moves from communique to concrete commitment.'

The G20 must deal with the important issues of averting economic crises similar to the recent recession and 'the even bigger and more complex ones emerging as a result of climate change, environmental degradation and unsustainable overexploitation of the planet’s natural assets.'

As Steiner pointed out, there are some very promising signs that more and more countries are understanding the urgency of the climate change crisis. Korea has earmarked close to 90 percent of its funds to a short- and long-term vision of green growth. The country’s leaders have also made the indivisible link between the leadership role of public policy making in terms of unleashing private sector investment into clean tech and other green sectors.

The costs associated with climate change are being factored into the thinking of an increasing number of banks and pension funds who are beginning to see rising risks to their investments from the loss of ecosystems. Increasingly people understand that the disruption to food supplies, supply chains and other challenges linked with natural resource losses are a much bigger threat than international terrorism.


Related Posts
The G20 and the Transition to a Greener Economy
The G20 and the Green Economy
Greenpeace's G20 Checklist
Spain Renews its Commitment to Clean Energy at the G20
UN Chief Asks G20 to Focus on a Sustainable Recovery
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
G20 Summit in Toronto Ends with Little Action on Climate Change
G20 Must Cooperate for a Sustainable Recovery
G20 and Central Bank Governors Joint Communique
G20 Disagreements and Global Economic Reforms
Program and Plans for G8 and G20 Summits in Canada
UN Climate Change Initiatives Post Toronto
G20 Security Concerns Force Cancellation of Sustainable Supply Chain Event
G20 Protestors Dilute Green Message
Canadians Disappointed with Conservative's Lack of leadership at the Toronto G20 Summit
The G20 and the Developing World Disagree on Proposed Climate Change Protocols
Competing National Priorities
End Fossil Fuel Subsidies
Local Business Promotes Green Agenda for G20 in Pittsburgh
G20 Lays the Foundation for a Better World
Global Warming Exposes Resources but Arctic Meeting Leaves Some Out in the Cold
G8's More Aggressive GHG Targets

GOVgreen Conference & Expo

On November 9-10, 2010, GOVgreen held their Conference & Expo in Washington, DC. The event included eco-friendly car displays and over 100 exhibitors selling green products and services.

The keynote address was delivered on November 10, by environmentalist and president of the Waterkeeper Alliance, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Mr Kennedy also took part in a press conference which followed.

There were technical Workshops and a plenary session with key representatives from DoD, DoS, GSA and EPA. In total there were 30 educational sessions presented by 85 speakers.

This event was organized to help government employees, military personnel and contractors learn about and comply with federal sustainability initiatives mandated by President Obama’s Executive Order 13514. It provides solutions for the government to reduce its carbon footprint, addressing areas such as energy, conservation, transportation and facilities.

GOVgreen conferences are free for government and military employees and open to contractors and consultants.

For more information go to GOVgreen.


Related Posts
Standard Compliance Knowledge Center for Green Government
GreenBiz Innovation Forum 2010
Green Festival`s Business Seminars
Opportunity Green Business Networking Event and Awards
The Green California Community College Summit
The Clean Energy Manufacturing Summit
Peak Oil Conference
2010 Green Schools Summit Workshop & Conference
The Green Building Focus Conference and Expo
Conference on Pricing Carbon Emissions
CleanTech Open Conference
Midwest Best Practices Conference for Sustainable Communities
Business for the Environment Global Summit
NYSE Green Summit
The 2010 World Energy Technologies Summit
Sustainable Brands 2010
Start and the Electric Eco-Car Spectacular
Calendar of World Environmental Events - Spring 2010
Calendar of Global Environmental Events Summer 2010
Calendar of Global Environmental Events - Fall 2010

Senate Democrats and the Environmental Agenda

Despite midterm election losses in the Senate, the Democrats managed to hang on to a narrow majority. But what does that mean for energy and climate issues?

Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) has won re-election and will remain Chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Boxer will continue to work for clean energy and the environment.

Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev) will retain his position as Majority Leader. Senator Reid has been the President’s lead advocate on advancing renewable energy and regulating the fossil fuel industry.

Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) will remain the Chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Senator Bingaman is a lead proponent of a renewable electricity mandate. Bingaman is also an advocate of more responsible rules for offshore oil and gas production.

Besides control of these committees, the Democratic Senate majority could stop the Republican controlled House from getting environmentally destructive legislation onto the President's desk. But we should remember that Democratic Senators have little respect for party discipline and some have demonstrated a propensity to break ranks when they feel it serves their political interests.

Democratic Senators who have betrayed the party, the President and the environment, include Sens. Ben Nelson, (D-Neb.), Jim Webb, (D-Va.). Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Kent Conrad (D-N.D.).

With the Democrats holding 23 of the 33 Senate seats being contested in 2012 (including two independents who caucus with the Democrats), Senators will have to choose between pandering to public confusion or taking on the tough issues. It remains to be seen whether Democrats will try to lead America to a cleaner more secure future or follow the polls and cower in fear.


Related Posts
Democrats Learning the Wrong Lesson from Republicans
House Democrats Punished Despite Populist Pandering
Democrats the Environment and Green Jobs
Video: How to Get People to Vote for Climate Change
Foxes in the Henhouse: Republicans Climate and Energy Committees
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and Redistricting
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and the Clean Energy Economy
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and US Carbon Trading Programs
Republicans' Anti-Science Stance on Global Warming
Republican Strategy for the 2010 Midterms and Beyond
Republican Political Finance and the Midterm Elections
Republicans Undermining Climate Legislation
Green Stimulus Spending and Republican Opposition
Environmental Issues in California and 5 Key Senate Races
The 2010 Midterms and the Fight Against Climate Change
Deniers Deprived of Misinformation Strategy
The Dangerous Diversion of Climategate
The Business of Climate Change Deception
The New International System: The Role of Government
What is Wrong with the Right

Democrats Learning the Wrong Lesson from Republicans

Although Republicans are the undisputed masters of the smear campaign, some Democrats are no better. In the 2010 midterm elections, Democrats followed the polls and fell silent on the issue of climate change. In the process, Democrats abandoned their President and their parties agenda.

To gain political favor Democrats used tactics more commonly associated with Republicans. Democratic candidates for the House resorted to attack ads devoid of an issue oriented message. They dug up Republican candidates’ personal financial records and Democratic candidate Ron Klein put his Republican opponent’s Social Security number in a TV ad.

Democratic candidate Frank Caprio told Obama to “Shove it!” on a radio show, referring to the President's endorsement. Caprio subsequently failed in his bid for governor of Rhode Island, but this tactic is reminiscent of South Carolina Republican Joe Wilson shouting, "You lie!" during President Obama's speech to Congress.

Democrats should not look to the Republicans for anything, the right is the wrong direction for America. Rather than engaging the misinformation that passes as fact, Democrats are looking for a strategy to win re-election thereby putting self interest ahead of the national interest.

Democrats need to do a much better job addressing the issues and communicating a party platform that explains the need for action on energy and climate change. Above all Democrats need to stop following Republicans and show America they know the meaning of leadership.


Related Posts
Senate Democrats and the Environmental Agenda
House Democrats Punished Despite Populist Pandering
Democrats the Environment and Green Jobs
Video: How to Get People to Vote for Climate Change
Foxes in the Henhouse: Republicans Climate and Energy Committees
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and Redistricting
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and the Clean Energy Economy
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and US Carbon Trading Programs
Republicans' Anti-Science Stance on Global Warming
Republican Strategy for the 2010 Midterms and Beyond
Republican Political Finance and the Midterm Elections
Republicans Undermining Climate Legislation
Green Stimulus Spending and Republican Opposition
Environmental Issues in California and 5 Key Senate Races
The 2010 Midterms and the Fight Against Climate Change
Deniers Deprived of Misinformation Strategy
The Dangerous Diversion of Climategate
The Business of Climate Change Deception
The New International System: The Role of Government
What is Wrong with the Right

House Democrats Punished Despite Populist Pandering

Many Democrats are guilty of pandering to populism. Rather than sticking to the facts and communicating the truth, Democratic candidates are avoiding contentious issues to save their political skins.

Although it is clear that Republicans are global warming deniers, the Democrats must also shoulder blame for the failure of Congress to secure climate and energy legislation in President Obama's first term.

Taking their cues from polls, Democrats ignored the environment during the 2010 midterms. They failed to communicate the urgency of climate change and the importance of being a competitive player in the burgeoning green economy. This kind of political cowardice undermines efforts to engage the struggle against climate change and puts American global comptitiveness at risk.

In 2009, the House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act, also known as the Waxman-Markey energy and climate bill. With increasingly numbers of Americans succumbing to misinformation, Democrats who resisted the bill could be mistaken for a shrewd strategists intent on self preservation.

However, many House Democrats who voted against the bill, lost their bids for re-election. Two dozen House Democrats who voted for the energy and climate bill were voted out of office in the 2010 midterms, along with 19 who opposed the bill.

With the electorate so woefully confused on climate change, America needs leaders that will aggresively engage misfinformation. By following public opinion on climate change rather than leading the discussion, Democrats are reifying the Republican's lies.


Related Posts
Democrats Learning the Wrong Lesson from Republicans
Senate Democrats and the Environmental Agenda
Democrats the Environment and Green Jobs
Video: How to Get People to Vote for Climate Change
Foxes in the Henhouse: Republicans Climate and Energy Committees
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and Redistricting
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and the Clean Energy Economy
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and US Carbon Trading Programs
Republicans' Anti-Science Stance on Global Warming
Republican Strategy for the 2010 Midterms and Beyond
Republican Political Finance and the Midterm Elections
Republicans Undermining Climate Legislation
Green Stimulus Spending and Republican Opposition
Environmental Issues in California and 5 Key Senate Races
The 2010 Midterms and the Fight Against Climate Change
Deniers Deprived of Misinformation Strategy
The Dangerous Diversion of Climategate
The Business of Climate Change Deception
The New International System: The Role of Government
What is Wrong with the Right

Republican Gubernatorial Gains and Redistricting

Republican politicians are preparing to use redistricting to serve their own interests and ignore the public good. Although the ramifications largely escape public notice, the influx of Republican governors in the 2010 midterms will significantly influence redistricting. Republicans will control the redrawing of over 200 House districts, compared to only a few dozen for Democrats. This will make it even more difficult to get electoral support for President Obama's agenda, including energy and climate change.

Every 10 years, legislative district lines are redrawn, ostensibly to reflect demographic changes revealed by the census. The redistricting process is also the single most important lever for states to influence the composition of Congress. Ultimately redistricting determines electoral and legislative outcomes. With the exception of a handful of states, these decisions are made with little or no public input or accountability.

There are a total of 36 states on track for redistricting. While the number of Congressional seats is determined by population, each state has its own redistricting process. In 42 states the processes is done in the state legislature and then confirmed by the governor, sometimes the state supreme court. There are seven states that operate on commission systems that includes a review by other governing bodies. However, Arizona’s commission of non-elected residents does not need final legislative input or approval. The other seven states have just one Congressional district.

The midterm election of 2010 included three state ballot initiatives that dealt with redistricting decisions through independent commissions. California approved Proposition 20 and Oklahoma voters approved State Question 748.

Florida voters approved constitutional amendments requiring Congressional and state legislative districts to follow city, county, or geographical boundaries. The amendments also stipulate that districts must have similar population distribution, be compact, and must not favor or disfavor a political party or incumbent or disenfranchise any racial or ethnic group.

Republicans control approximately 204 districts, but the passage of Proposition 20 in California means 53 more seats are off the table for Democrats. The control of 27 districts in Florida depends on the outcome of litigation. Democrats control 47, as it stands, with another 27 in the New York State Senate, another 20 in Oregon, Minnesota, and Colorado and another 2 depending on the role Rhode Island governor elect Lincoln Chafee decides to play in the process. North Carolina counts toward the Republican total, as the governor has no sway over redistricting.

Controlling a governorship can often be a boon to a party in a presidential race. Politicians use redistricting as an opportunity to cut unfavorable constituents and potential challengers out of their districts. Incumbents can also use redistricting to move favorable constituents into their districts.

Transparency is the only way to hold politicians accountable for their redistricting efforts. Scholars at the Brookings Institution along with the American Enterprise Institute have consulted with an array of experts in redistricting issues to provide a set of principles for transparency and public participation.

The new slate of Republican governers are planning to gerrymander legislative lines behind closed doors and this does not bode well for America's democracy or the war against climate change.


Related Posts
The Foxes in the Henhouse: Republicans in Charge of Climate and Energy Committees
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and the Clean Energy Economy
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and US Carbon Trading Programs
Republicans' Anti-Science Stance on Global Warming
Republican Strategy for the 2010 Midterms and Beyond
Republican Political Finance and the Midterm Elections
Republicans Undermining Climate Legislation
Green Stimulus Spending and Republican Opposition
Environmental Issues in California and 5 Key Senate Races
The 2010 Midterms and the Fight Against Climate Change
Deniers Deprived of Misinformation Strategy
The Dangerous Diversion of Climategate
The Business of Climate Change Deception
The New International System: The Role of Government
What is Wrong with the Right

Republican Gubernatorial Gains and US Carbon Trading Programs

The Midterm gubernatorial elections of 2010 have important implications for regional market based mechanisms of greenhouse gas reductions. Although these programs spur innovation in the clean energy economy and create green jobs, some Republican governors have already indicated that they are planning to withdraw from these agreements.

The three major carbon trading programs in the US are the
Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) and the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord (Midwestern Accord).

RGGI is a carbon trading program that involves Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont, it went into effect in 2008. There is one observer state (Pennsylvania), and four Canadian provinces are also observers (Québec, New Brunswick and Ontario).

RGGI is a successful regional initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. RGGI is implementing a cap and trade system for CO2 emissions from power plants in the member states. Emission permit auctioning began in September 2008, and the first three-year compliance period began on January 1, 2009. Proceeds will be used to promote energy conservation and renewable energy. The system affects fossil fuel power plants with 25 MW or greater generating capacity. Since 2008, the program has generated more than $700 million for renewable energy and efficiency programs.

The governor races for states participating in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) have mostly gone to the Democrats. Although the Democrats won seven of the ten states involved in RGGI program (Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont), they lost Maine. New Jersey did not have a gubernatorial election this year, but the current Rebuplican governor (Chris Christie) supports RGGI.

Lincoln D. Chafee is Rhode Island's new Governor, he is a Republican turned independent and he has a long track record of environmental accomplishments. Sheila Dormody, president of the Environment Council of Rhode Island said, “we will have a good environmental leader in the new governor.”

WCI, is a regional cap-and-trade compact between California, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, Oregon, Montana, Arizona (although Arizona rescinded its partnership agreement on February 5, 2010), and four Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec). WCI was established in 2007 and scheduled to go into effect in 2012.

The observers are Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Nevada, Wyoming, the province of Saskatchewan and the Mexican states of Baja California, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, Sonora and Tamaulipas.

WCI is an initiative to combat climate change caused by global warming, independent of their national governments. WCI is a collaboration of independent jurisdictions working together to identify, evaluate, and implement policies to tackle climate change at a regional level. This is a comprehensive effort to reduce greenhouse gas pollution, spur investment in clean-energy technologies that create green jobs and reduce dependence on imported oil.

The governor races in Western Climate Initiative states are roughly split with 3 of 5 races going to Republican governors. While California and Oregon have voted for a Democrat in the statehouse, Republicans won in New Mexico, Utah, and Arizona.

The newly elected Republican governors in Arizona and Utah have already began working to end their state's involvement with the carbon trading program.

The Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord (Midwestern Accord) is a regional agreement by six governors of states in the US Midwest and the Premier of one Canadian province to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change.

Signatories to the Accord are the US states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Kansas, and the Canadian Province of Manitoba. Observers of the Accord are Indiana, Ohio, and South Dakota, as well as the Canadian Province of Ontario.

The Midwestern Accord was signed on November 15, 2007. In June 2009, the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord Advisory Group finalized its draft.

The Midwestern Accord establishes greenhouse gas reduction targets and develops a market-based and multi-sector cap-and-trade mechanism to help achieve those reduction targets. It includes a system to enable tracking, management, and crediting for entities that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Midwest accord also develops and implements additional steps as needed to achieve the reduction targets, such as a low-carbon fuel standards, regional incentives and funding mechanisms.

In the 2010 midterms, Minnesota, went to a democratic governor, while Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan and Wisconsin all went to Republican governors.

Judging by the number of Republican governors, RGGI looks as though it will survive, while the participation of all the member states in the proposed Western Climate Initiative is in doubt. It can be expected that the Midwest Accord will suffer now that Midwestern governors are predominantly Republican.

Despite the influx of Republican governors, these trading agreements are crucial to preserve any hope of eventually implementing a federal carbon trading program.


Related Posts
The Foxes in the Henhouse: Republicans in Charge of Climate and Energy Committees
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and the Clean Energy Economy
Republican Gubernatorial Gains and Redistricting
Republicans' Anti-Science Stance on Global Warming
Republican Strategy for the 2010 Midterms and Beyond
Republican Political Finance and the Midterm Elections
Republicans Undermining Climate Legislation
Green Stimulus Spending and Republican Opposition
Environmental Issues in California and 5 Key Senate Races
The 2010 Midterms and the Fight Against Climate Change
Deniers Deprived of Misinformation Strategy
The Dangerous Diversion of Climategate
The Business of Climate Change Deception
The New International System: The Role of Government
What is Wrong with the Right