|
How You can Take Action on Global Warming
Are you concerned about Global
Warming and want to move from concern to action? We support two action
centered
groups which
are also sponsored by the Unitarian Universalist Church West Earth Ministry
Committee,
who are addressing this problem. The Renewable Energy Group meets to learn
more about alternative energy sources (wind, solar, biomass, geothermal,
water) and use this knowledge to educate others and support this technology.
- The next meeting is Monday, March 3, in Room C1 at 7:00pm. Hear Rick O’Conor
describe his work as project manager
for the new Green
Fields/Blue Sky wind farm SE
of Lake
Winnebago. We will use this knowledge in our educational work.
The Global Warming Group meets to develop and carry out action based
programs to reduce global warming.
- The next meeting is Tuesday,
March 4 in room C2 at 7:00pm. The group will work
on its plans to educate and lead the community, through programs
for local groups, to describe the problems of global warming and what each
person
can
do
about
it. This will include a program to work with individual municipal
government units (cities and towns) to implement specific programs within
each
community to reduce global warming through municipal government programs.
Location: The Unitarian Universalist Church West is located at: 13001 West
North Avenue,
Brookfield, WI
The purpose
of all of this work is to move people to action and help make a difference.
Anyone is invited to join us.
Wisconsin Safe Climate Act
Below are some things you can use to take action and show support
for the WI Safe Climate bill, but please do so quickly!
Sample Letters
to the Editor:
Wisconsin Can Stay in the Black by Going Green
Some of the opponents of Wisconsin’s Safe Climate Act are conveniently
leaving some key facts out of their arguments. They are hoping the citizens
of our
state won't notice that supporting policies that reduce global warming
pollution is not only critical for Wisconsin’s environment, but it is
also the only
way we will remain economically viable in the future.
For example:
- In 1998, the US Environmental Protection Agency assisted 7,427 businesses
in reducing tons of waste and preventing 80 million metric
tons of greenhouse gas emissions, resulting in a savings of $3.3
billion dollars.
- General Motors just reported billions in record-breaking losses,
forcing
them to offer buyouts to their remaining unionized
workforce. At the same time, Toyota, whose Prius sales passed Ford Explorers
for the
first
time
in January, is more poised than ever to overtake GM
as
the world’s largest automaker.
Wisconsin’s Safe Climate Act SB 81 / AB 157 will safeguard future generations
against the impacts of global warming pollution- including changes
in precipitation and rising temperatures that threaten natural habitats,
farming and tourism.
It does this using common sense measures like increasing energy
efficiency and investing in emerging clean energy technologies. It encourages
us to
take stock of our current situation by taking inventory of current
pollution levels, and then it puts in place an achievable goal of reducing
global warming
to 1990 levels by 2020.
This legislation will be a
boon to our economy, especially in struggling rural areas, by developing
sensible energy solutions such as wind,
biomass and solar pwer. The Wisconsin Safe Climate Act
will be coming up for a
vote as soon as February 26. Tell your state legislators
that you want them to sustain Wisconsin’s reputation as an innovative
leader
by voting "Yes" on
this critical bill. To find out who your Representative
is, go to http://waml.legis.state.wi.us/
Support Wisconsin’s Safe Climate Act and Look Your Children
in the Eye Now that it has widely scientifically established and politically
accepted
that global warming poses a major threat to Wisconsin, I am writing this
letter to say that we all have a responsibility to do something about it.
Do you want to tell your grandchildren or great grandchildren about your
the beautiful north woods that where we used to camp and swim or the wildlife
that you remember? Do you want to tell them about how you used to count
on spending every winter ice fishing and cross country skiing? Or would
you rather give them the opportunity to experience these opportunities
first hand?
The unique things we treasure about Wisconsin are all
threatened by global warming. Rep. Spencer Black recently said, "Global warming poses a
grave threat to the next generation. We have an obligation to act before
we see severe damage to our environment, our economy and our quality of
life." We can start to tackle this problem and reduce negative
impacts we are already seeing by urging our state legislators to
pass the WI Safe
Climate Act (SB 81 / AB 157). This bill requires the state to reduce
carbon dioxide pollution, the main cause of global warming.
Contacting Your Legislators
Please let your state legislators know that you want
them to vote "Yes" on
Wisconsin Safe Climate Act (SB 81 AB157), which will be up for a
vote as early as February 26. To find out who your Representative is,
go to
http://waml.legis.state.wi.us/
Talking
Points with your legislators from Rep. Spencer Black:
- Much of what we love about Wisconsin is put at risk by global warming.
The natural diversity of our ecosystems, the abundant wildlife,
the Great Lakes and our forests and wetlands will all be altered by climate
change.
- The Wisconsin Safe Climate Act (SB 81/ AB157) requires the state to
sharply reduce carbon dioxide pollution, the main cause of global
warming.
- By passing the Wisconsin Safe Climate Act, Wisconsin will be joining
17 other states have taken major steps to reduce greenhouse gases.
Since the
federal government will not take the strong action needed to combat
global warming, states must do the job.
- A broad coalition of conservation, faith, civic, farm, labor, health,
and student supports the Wisconsin Safe Climate Act.
Bridging the efficient light bulb
gender gap
Staff/news services
Capital Times, Madison WI
May 3, 2007
One of the dimly lighted truths of the
global warming era is that compact fluorescent light bulbs still
seem to be flunking out in most American homes -- often, market
research suggests -- because women are less likely to accept the
light they throw off.
"There is still a big hurdle in
convincing Americans that lighting purchase decisions make a big
difference in individual electricity bills and collectively for the
environment," said Wendy Reed, director of the federal government's
Energy Star campaign, which labels products that save energy and has
been working with retailers to market CFL bulbs.
"I have heard time and again that a
husband goes out and puts the bulb into the house, thinking he is
doing a good thing," Reed said. "Then, the CFL bulb is changed back
out by the women. It seems that women are much more concerned with
how things look. We are the nesters."
Madison
couples appear more enlightened, according to an informal sampling
of some environmentally minded couples. The only domestic arguments
appear to be over how many fluorescent light bulbs they can cram
into their homes.
Dane County Executive
Kathleen Falk and her husband, Peter Bock, say they
have no squabbles over the bulbs -- only a shared frustration that
they can't be put into every socket and fixture.
Meteorologist Brian Olson said, "If
anything, these bulbs have decreased fights in our house."
"Now, if my wife leaves the lights on,
I don't get mad. For a guy who pays the light bills, I have more
peace of mind," he said.
The current market share of CFL bulbs
in the
United States
is about 6 percent, up from less than 1 percent before 2001. But
that compares dismally with CFL adoption rates in other wealthy
countries such as Japan (80 percent), Germany (50 percent) and the United Kingdom
(20 percent). Australia
has announced a phaseout of incandescent bulbs by 2009, and the
Canadian province of Ontario decided last week to ban them by
2012.
A key to the abiding grass-roots
resistance to CFLs, Reed and other experts said, is indelible
consumer memories of the hideous looks and poor quality of earlier
generations of fluorescent lights. They were bulky. They were
expensive, as much as $25 each. They had an annoying flicker and
hum. They cast an icky, cold-white light that made people look pale,
wrinkly and old.
"People remember them from 20 years
ago and they are not going to forgive," said Dave Shiller, vice
president of new business development for MaxLite, a
Fairfield,
N.J., company that manufactures CFL
bulbs.
A new breed of bulbs solves most, if
not all, of the old gripes. The bulbs are smaller and much cheaper
-- often selling for as little as $1.50 each at big-box stores. Most
bulbs pay for themselves in reduced power consumption within six
months. They last seven to 10 years longer than incandescent bulbs.
The hum and flicker are long gone, and many bulbs are designed to
mimic the soothing, yellowish warmth of incandescent bulbs. (Most,
though, still do not work on dimmers.)
"The new fluorescent bulbs aren't just
better for both your wallet and the environment -- they produce
better light," declares the May issue of Popular Mechanics, in an
exhaustive comparison test of the new breed of CFLs against
incandescents.
Still, many consumers -- especially
women -- do not seem to be buying in.
A Washington Post-ABC News poll
released last week showed that while women are more likely than men
to say they are "very willing" to change behavior to help the
environment, they are less likely to have CFL bulbs at home.
Men have been aware of CFLs longer
than women, have bought them earlier and have installed more of them
in the house than women, according to surveys that the Northwest
Energy Efficiency Alliance has been conducting since 2004.
In groceries and drugstores, where 70
percent to 90 percent of light bulbs historically have been sold and
where women usually have been the ones doing the buying, CFLs have
not taken off nearly as fast as they have in home-improvement stores
such as Home Depot and Lowe's, where men do much of the shopping.
"My gut feeling is that the last
remaining factor that we have not cracked in selling these bulbs is
the wife test,' " said My Ton, a senior manager at Ecos Consulting,
a company in Portland, Ore., that does market research on energy
efficiency.
Global Warming Cannot be
Denied
By Dale R. Olen
Data seem to turn up every day pointing to
global warming (or “climate change” as politicians and scientists like to call
it today). But despite the preponderance of solid research indicating that our
world is heating up due to the emissions of “greenhouse gases” caused by human
activity, the Bush Administration continues to deny it’s happening.
In the latest study released, climate
scientists probing the depths of the oceans and the farthest reaches of space
found that the Earth is absorbing much more heat that it is giving off. James
Hansen NASA climatologist said the findings were a “smoking gun” that should
dispel all doubts that global warming is happening. The study concluded that
even if greenhouse gases were capped today, global temperatures would still rise
one degree Fahrenheit this century due to existing carbon dioxide emissions.
Scientists found that “for every square meter of surface area, the planet is
absorbing almost one watt more of the sun’s energy than it is radiating back to
space as heat—a historically large imbalance.” Such absorbed energy, they
concluded, warms the atmosphere.
These studies and research reports, however,
do not impress the present Administration. It has its own small group of
“scientists” who claim global warming does not exist. Intriguingly, every one
of these “scientists” is partially or totally funded by ExxonMobil and other
energy companies. In an article in Mother Jones Magazine (May/June, 2005),
Chris Mooney shows the link: “Forty public policy groups have this in common:
They seek to undermine the scientific consensus that humans are causing the
earth to overheat. And they all get money from Exxon Mobil.”
As a clinical psychologist, I have seen my
fair share of denial. It’s a powerful defense mechanism employed by people to
avoid pain, discomfort or loss. “It won’t happen to me;” “I don’t care if
he/she leaves;” “I’m not angry;” “It’s just a little heartburn.” So, it’s not
surprising that the oil companies and their friends (read Bush, Chaney, Norton,
etc.) would use denial as their defense against the pain of admitting global
warming and then having to stop using so much coal and oil. This bunch is in
denial because they are afraid of losing money.
We help people break the denial defense by
forcing them to face reality. We have to keep on showing them the facts. Here
is a very incomplete listing of facts that positively declares global warming
exists and it is a crisis that must be faced now:
- Average length of the
oil-exploration season on Alaska’s North Slope has dropped from 200 to 100
days a year. Heavy equipment isn’t allowed on the tundra during summer.
- The largest Arctic ice shelf broke
in 2002, releasing the Northern Hemisphere’s biggest body of ice-trapped
freshwater.
- Arctic sea ice is up to 40% thinner
than it was in the 1960s.
- Satellites take longer to fall to
earth due to reduced drag caused by greenhouse gases thinning the upper
atmosphere.
- From Sweden to Canada, tundra has
gone from soaking up CO2 to emitting greenhouse gases. Buildings in Siberia
and Alaska are sinking into the thawing permafrost.
- As tree lines rise and winters get
shorter, alpine meadows are receding in the Rockies, Alps, and Himalayas.
- In 2002, a collapsing glacier buried
a village in the Caucasus Mountains (Europe) under 3 million tons of ice and
mud.
- The German ski resort that hosted
the 1936 Winter Olympics must now use snow machines to stay open.
- In 2003 the Danube River hit its
lowest level in 100 years, revealing the masts of sunken WWII warships.
- In 1997, hundreds of African storks
migrating to Europe got confused by unusual spring weather, turned around,
and died of exhaustion in Turkey.
- Most of North America, Europe, and
parts of South America are experiencing 30% more days with highs over 90F
than they did a century ago.
- Glacier National Park has lost 1/3
of its glaciers in the past 150 years.
- The residents of Shishmaref, Alaska,
voted to move inland to avoid rising sea levels.
- Scientists predict that by the
century end, Napa Valley will be too hot to grow world-class wine grapes.
- For every degree ocean temperatures
rise, maximum storm winds increase by 5 mph.
- The first recorded south Atlantic
hurricane occurred in March 2004
- Back in 1990, insurance giant Swiss
Re announced that global warming was bad for its bottom line. Weather
disasters cost insurance companies $54 billion in 2003.
- 458,000 people were killed by
extreme weather events in Southeast Asia in the 1990s, more than 8 times the
number killed in the 1980s.
- The island nation of Tuvalu has
asked Australia and New Zealand to absorb its population before ocean levels
do.
- About 55% of the Great Barrier Reef
has been bleached.
- Southern New Zealand’s glaciers have
gotten 25% smaller in the past century.
- Heard Island, 2,500 miles southwest
of Australia, is now warm enough for plant life, including a species of
roses.
- A piece of ice hundreds of years old
and bigger than Rode Island broke off Antarctica in 2002.
(Source: Mother
Jones Magazine, May/June, 2005, pp. 46-47)
Global warming is happening. Yet we are
nearly the only country in the world in serious denial. We need to keep the
facts before the eyes of our government and call it to open its eyes and face
reality. World temperature must come before corporate profits.
|
