Go Rockefellers! Rockefellers Stand Up Against Exxon!

So it looks like the Rockefellers made the news! 73 of the 78 living adult descendants of the Rockefeller family are standing up against Exxon!

You will love to read this article yourself, so make sure to click on the link in the title, but here are some key points I loved!

"The proposal, which was approved by 39.5 percent of shareholders, was one of four resolutions that garnered substantial shareholder support from the extended Rockefeller family, state pension funds, institutional holders and individuals, though all of the measures fell short of the majority needed. The other resolutions would have forced the company to give shareholders some say over executive pay, prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation, draw up a plan to cut its own greenhouse gas emissions and turn its attention toward clean energy resources. "

"This year, the Rockefellers decided to take to the floor of the annual shareholders meeting, strongly supporting the resolution separating the chief executive and chairman positions and sponsoring the resolution urging Exxon to come up with targets for greenhouse gas emissions and a strategy for developing clean energy resources. (It was the seventh consecutive year that a resolution to separate the chairman and chief executive jobs -- a division common in U.S. corporations -- was on the agenda.) "

An exciting quote from Neva Rockefeller Goodwin:
"Goodwin said that the company's forecasts of strong oil-demand growth from developing nations were inconsistent with the consequences of climate change from growing greenhouse gas emissions. 'Those nations will be the ones most adversely affected by climate change,' she said. "

My mom sent me this article, so I thank her for sending it to me! I told her that I like getting news like this and that it makes me smile! She completely agreed!

If you haven't seen it, the Washington Post has a new Green section!

Another exciting article was in the Post on Sunday: Food or Fuel? Maybe We Can Have Both. Now even if you aren't big on biofuels and the use of ethanol, this is a start! "All 33 cars on the track will be running on 100 percent ethanol derived from corn. "

G8 Ministers Reducing Carbon Emissions

So it looks like the G8 Ministers are discussing reducing carbon emissions by half by 2050. It looks like the European countries support the 2020 goals while the US thinks they are beyond reach and Japan thinks "its premature to commit to 2020 limits."

The main thing I got out of this article was "But the ministers from the U.S., Japan, Germany, France, Britain, Canada, Italy and Russia, in a carefully worded statement, mentioned only the need to set such targets eventually. That frustrated environmentalists and some European ministers."

When will people get off of this 'eventually' kick. This frustrates me too! This is why OT must keep work hard to help educate people what our future is going to look like without any major policy change.

I guess we will see what happens at the G8 Summit that takes place in Tokyo in July.

Meanwhile, conservative and free-market groups in the US will begin airing ads to press members of the Senate to vote against a bill that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. "The proposed legislation calls for capping carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, transportation and industrial sources with a goal of reducing greenhouse gases by 71 percent by mid-century."

I wish that people would realize that this is what is needed.

What are your thoughts OT blog?

How to deal with Polar Bears

It's an interesting situation now that the US has named polar bears as a "Threatened" Species. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said that "the loss of Arctic sea ice in a warming climate could drive them to the brink of extinction in less than four decades". Kempthorne goes on to say that in saving the polar bears, it is not a time to look at policy. Really?

Per the Washington Post, "Under the law, the federal government is now required to draft a recovery plan for the species, which entails assessing the population and its habitat. The ruling also compels federal agencies to consult with the Interior Department when considering decisions that could further imperil the polar bears."

I see no way that we can "save" the polar bears without looking at our current policy, or lack thereof. As has been proven before, greenhouse gas emissions are responsible for the sea ice melting. Therefore, how can you stop or at least lessen the ice melt without addressing greenhouse gas emissions?

Is there anything else we can do to save the polar bears in the immediate or long-term future? Are we going to have to wait until January 2009? I think this YouTube video speaks for itself...