"My presidency will mark a new chapter in America's leadership on climate change that will strengthen our security and create millions of new jobs in the process."

– President-elect Barack Obama, November 18, 2008




November 18, 2008

Dear Environmental Activist:

Forward this Transition Report to friends and family to keep the discussion going.



Today has been a big day in the fight against global warming.

President-elect Barack Obama gave his strongest public commitment to date in support of a national cap-and-trade system to reduce America's global warming pollution and unleash a clean energy revolution.

The President-elect told the Bi-Partisan Governors Global Climate Summit, underway this week in Los Angeles, CA:

I promise you this: When I am president, any governor who's willing to promote clean energy will have a partner in the White House. Any company that's willing to invest in clean energy will have an ally in Washington. And any nation that's willing to join the cause of combating climate change will have an ally in the United States of America.

He went on to call for a national cap-and-trade system that will "establish strong annual targets that set us on a course to reduce emissions to their 1990 levels by 2020 and reduce them an additional 80% by 2050."

What makes this statement momentous is that it signals President-elect Obama's intention to make global warming a central priority for his first term.

EDF President Fred Krupp issued the following statement in response:

President-elect Obama got it exactly right. His plan... will jump-start job creation in new energy industries, and take a huge step toward solving climate change. We strongly applaud President-elect Obama's statement today, and his leadership on this issue.

Meanwhile, at a news conference back in Washington, DC, EDF joined a diverse coalition of 32 leading corporations and environmental groups in calling for national legislation to limit the release of global warming pollution.

EDF was a founding member last year of the coalition—the United States Climate Action Partnership, or US-CAP for short—which was established to add powerful support for effective national climate legislation.

Taken together, these announcements represent a truly historic day in our fight against global warming.

It is important to remember, however, we haven't won anything yet.

These words, while encouraging, won't mean a thing if we can't move legislation through both the House and the Senate starting January 20th.

This gets us in the game, but we've got a lot of work ahead.

We'll keep you posted through regular Transition Report emails.

In the meantime, please forward this email to friends, family, colleagues, and anyone else interested in joining our global warming fight.

Encourage them to sign onto our 2009 Green Energy Petition: http://action.edf.org/campaign/green_energy_petition

And, please keep your comments coming into our Green Room. http://blogs.edf.org/greenroom/2008/11/18/your-thoughts-on-ou...

Thanks for all you do,
Sam Parry
Director, Online Membership and Activism

Can Greed Be Green? | Commentary: Why Al Gore and T. Boone Pickens think so.



By Monika Bauerlein http://www.motherjones.com/people/Monika-Bauerlein.html and Clara Jeffery http://www.motherjones.com/people/Clara-Jeffery.html

November/December 2008 Issue http://www.motherjones.com/toc/2008/11/index.html

If you've watched TV recently, you might have noticed the T. Boone Pickens ads: "I've been an oilman my whole life," the old wildcatter intones over shots of burning wells and soldiers in Iraq; but America's dependence on foreign oil "is one emergency we can't drill our way out of." We must build "a new renewable energy network" starting with hundreds of wind farms to generate 20 percent of our electricity, and switch 38 percent of our cars and trucks to run on natural gas.

Pickens isn't just in it for the planet. He's building a massive wind farm in the Texas Panhandle (for the hidden agenda in that deal, see "Ripe for the Pickens"), and one of his companies, Clean Energy, owns natural gas filling stations throughout the country. He's also backing a California measure that would hand out rebates of up to $50,000 for alternative-fuel vehicles.

So? Just another not-quite-honest ad; it's hardly the worst we've seen lately, and not even close to Pickens' own lowest hour, the bankrolling of the 2004 Swift Boat campaign. (Ah, Swift Boat—the good old days, when politicians thought they had to have others do the lying for them.) But Pickens' self-interest aside, his pitch does hint at the national debate we could be having if we weren't talking about hockey moms.

True, Pickens is no Al Gore; his obsession is foreign oil, not climate change, and his plan is only about buying time until we get away from fossil fuels—another generation from now, he figures. (Gore, on the other hand, argues that we already have the means at hand—see "Can We Save the Planet and Rescue the Economy at the Same Time?" http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/11/can-we-save-t... —and that we need to move to clean energy in 10 years, not 30, if we wish to preserve a habitable planet.) Still, the fact that T. Boone Pickens and Al Gore speak approvingly of each other these days points to a tide beginning to turn.

Perhaps the most recognizable term for the concept coming into our collective view is "sustainability," which, stripped of its farmers market-meets-Madison Avenue gloss, means nothing more than "a way of doing things that ensures survival." A financial market built around housing pyramid schemes, debt no one is responsible for, and loans no one can afford? Unsustainable. A federal climate policy consisting of fuel-efficiency standards that will take effect 12 years from now? Unsustainable. A politics built around stoking resentment at a time when we desperately need unified action? Exactly.

T. Boone Pickens seems to have caught, um, wind of this. He vows that his new passion has made him nonpartisan; he told the Washington Times he's stopped giving to political campaigns and instead aims to shell out $58 million to advertise the Pickens Plan. He's all about organizing a popular movement; so what if he intends to make money along the way? Greed is a great motivator, and if it can help bring change, we're all for it.

What has become brutally clear the past couple of months, however, is that greed alone can't fix the mess we're in. Greed alone got us Enron and the mortgage mess and a civilization-endangering level of carbon; greed alone means that no one wants to be the first to stop burning coal or selling subprimes because the guy in the next corner office won't be so thoughtful. Greed alone means delaying a more sustainable economy until ExxonMobil, General Motors, and whichever banks are still in business have extracted the last drop of profit from the current system.

Perhaps the war in Iraq didn't demonstrate this clearly enough; perhaps back-to-back-to-back hurricanes didn't either; maybe even the Wall Street meltdown didn't quite make the point. But all three together add up to one inescapable conclusion. As Gore puts it, "We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet."

As a nation, we've barely even acknowledged this self-destructive feedback loop; we still need to have the messy, far-reaching debate that is the only way in a democracy to solve messy, far-reaching problems. No politician can be expected to have all the answers. What is borderline criminal is to lull the American people into believing we don't have a problem, and that, should we have one, the fix won't involve sacrifice. Even Barack Obama's energy plan doesn't see us getting more than 25 percent of our electricity from renewable sources by 2025 and sidesteps tough choices by betting on mythical alternatives like "clean coal."

We're not expecting Winston Churchill-level promises of blood, sweat, and tears—though some Churchillian spine would not hurt. But we do need a 21st-century version of "ask what you can do for your country." We need an Apollo program-cum-Manhattan Project, and we need it now.

Over the past year, thanks to the perfect storm in our energy and financial markets, the possibility has emerged of a true moment of national focus—the kind of opportunity that we missed in the wake of 9/11. If T. Boone Pickens can figure that out, so should the rest of us.

Monika Bauerlein http://www.motherjones.com/people/Monika-Bauerlein.html and Clara Jeffery http://www.motherjones.com/people/Clara-Jeffery.html are coeditors of Mother Jones.

Photo: Anne Hamersky

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/17/paul-krugman-schools...

Paul Krugman Schools George Will On The Great Depression

The Huffington Post | November 17, 2008 10:14 AM

On ABC's This Week, conservative pundit George Will took up the case against Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, arguing that it sent confusing signals to capitalists (who apparently might otherwise have pursued lucrative deals in the 1930s market place) and turned a depression into the Great Depression.

Thankfully, Nobel laureate Paul Krugman was around to remind Will of some history -- that the economy improved after the New Deal, and that it was FDR's attempt to balance the budget in 1937 (a move favored now by many conservatives) that then cut into that progress.

Op-Ed Contributor

What’s Good for G.M. Is Good for the Army


Jason Logan

By WESLEY K. CLARK
Published: November 17, 2008

AMERICA’S automobile industry is in desperate trouble. Financial instability, the credit squeeze and closed capital markets are hurting domestic automakers, while decades of competition from foreign producers have eroded market share and consumer loyalty. Some economists question the wisdom of Washington’s intervening to help the Big Three, arguing that the automakers should pay the price for their own mistakes or that the market will correct itself. But we must act: aiding the American automobile industry is not only an economic imperative, but also a national security imperative.

When President Dwight Eisenhower observed that America’s greatest strength wasn’t its military, but its economy, he must have had companies like General Motors and Ford in mind. Sitting atop a vast pyramid of tool makers, steel producers, fabricators and component manufacturers, these companies not only produced the tanks and trucks that helped win World War II, but also lent their technology to aircraft and ship manufacturing. The United States truly became the arsenal of democracy.

During the 1950s, advances in aviation, missiles, satellites and electronics made Detroit seem a little old-fashioned in dealing with the threat of the Soviet Union. The Army’s requests for new trucks and other basic transportation usually came out a loser in budget battles against missile technology and new modifications for the latest supersonic jet fighter. Not only were airplanes far sexier but they also counted as part of our military “tooth,” while much of the land forces’ needs were “tail.” And in those days, “more teeth, less tail” had become a key concept in military spending.

But in 1991, the Persian Gulf war demonstrated the awesome utility of American land power, and the Humvee (and its civilian version, the Hummer) became a star. Likewise, the ubiquitous homemade bombs of the current Iraq insurgency have led to the development of innovative armor-protected wheeled vehicles for American forces, as well as improvements in our fleets of Humvees, tanks, armored fighting vehicles, trucks and cargo carriers.

In a little more than a year, the Army has procured and fielded in Iraq more than a thousand so-called mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles. The lives of hundreds of soldiers and marines have been saved, and their tasks made more achievable, by the efforts of the American automotive industry. And unlike in World War II, America didn’t have to divert much civilian capacity to meet these military needs. Without a vigorous automotive sector, those needs could not have been quickly met.

More challenges lie ahead for our military, and to meet them we need a strong industrial base. For years the military has sought better sources of electric power in its vehicles — necessary to allow troops to monitor their radios with diesel engines off, to support increasingly high-powered communications technology, and eventually to support electric propulsion and innovative armaments like directed-energy weapons. In sum, this greater use of electricity will increase combat power while reducing our footprint. Much research and development spending has gone into these programs over the years, but nothing on the manufacturing scale we really need.

Now, though, as Detroit moves to plug-in hybrids and electric-drive technology, the scale problem can be remedied. Automakers are developing innovative electric motors, many with permanent magnet technology, that will have immediate military use. And only the auto industry, with its vast purchasing power, is able to establish a domestic advanced battery industry. Likewise, domestic fuel cell production — which will undoubtedly have many critical military applications — depends on a vibrant car industry.

To be sure, the public should demand transformation and new standards in the auto industry before paying to keep it alive. And we should insist that Detroit’s goals include putting America in first place in hybrid and electric automotive technology, reducing the emissions of the country’s transportation fleet, and strengthening our competitiveness abroad.

This should be no giveaway. Instead, it is a historic opportunity to get it right in Detroit for the good of the country. But Americans must bear in mind that any federal assistance plan would not be just an economic measure. This is, fundamentally, about national security.

Wesley K. Clark, a retired Army general and former supreme allied commander of NATO, is a senior fellow at the Burkle Center for International Relations at the University of California at Los Angeles.

A version of this article appeared in print on November 16, 2008, on page WK14 of the New York edition.

November 17, 2008

by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Satyam Khanna, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Ali Frick, Ryan Powers, and Brad Johnson

ENVIRONMENT | Putting The Brakes On Coal Pollution

The brakes have been applied to the construction of new coal plants in the United States following a permit denial last week by the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) top rulemaking panel. The EPA's Environmental Appeals Board ruled Thursday that the EPA had no valid reason for failing to place limits on the global warming emissions from Desert Power's proposed 110-megawatt coal-fired power plant in Vernal, UT. Deseret's Bonanza Generating Station, which would have emitted 3.37 million tons of carbon dioxide each year, is one of about 100 proposed coal plants that may now be required to limit their greenhouse gas emissions. "The carbon-intensive fossil fuel provides nearly half of the United States' electricity, and is responsible for some 30% of the country's greenhouse gas emissions," wrote Time magazine. If the proposed plants are built "without the means to capture and sequester underground the carbon they emit -- and it's far from clear that such technology will be commercially viable in the near-term -- our ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and avert climate change will be meaningless."

'BACK TO SQUARE ONE': In July 2007, the EPA issued a permit for the Bonanza plant, ignoring the Clean Air Act's stipulation that new plants must include a "best-available control technology" emissions limit for each pollutant "subject to regulation under the Act." Three months earlier, the Supreme Court had ruled that carbon dioxide is a global warming pollutant and mandated the EPA to take action. Before the Sierra Club brought suit against the Bonanza permit for ignoring the Supreme Court decision, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform opened an investigation, saying, "The Administration's shameful decision rewards polluters, flouts the Clean Air Act, and fails the American people." Corporate trade groups who joined the Bush administration in arguing the permit should be upheld included the American Petroleum Institute, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Chemistry Council and the National Association of Manufacturers. The Environmental Appeals Board instead found for the plaintiffs, describing the Bush administration's arguments in a 69-page decision as "weak," "questionable," "not sustainable," and "not sufficient." The decision rebuked the EPA for failing to issue CO2 regulations, repeatedly recommending an "action of nationwide scope." The EPA board is "sending this permit -- and effectively sending every other permit -- back to square one," said David Bookbinder, chief climate counsel for the Sierra Club. He added, "It's minimum a one- to two-year delay for every proposed coal-fired power plant in the United States."

RISKS OF COAL: Coal is the dominant fuel for electricity generation in the United States because of its historically low cost for producers, but that is only because the real price of its pollution is not considered. The particulate matter, smog, and acid rain from burning coal cause billions of dollars in additional health costs a year. As Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) said this summer, "Coal makes us sick." Combined with the environmental degradation of mining coal and the planetary risks of climate change from coal's carbon dioxide emissions, the "market externalities" of coal-fired electricity -- the costs paid by society, not the producers -- mean that the true cost of coal is immense. In October, Dynegy, a major owner of coal-burning power plants, "agreed to put detailed information in its financial filings on any material business risks posed by climate change." Innovest Strategic Value Advisors has warned investors and ratepayers of the financial risks of proposed unregulated coal-fired plants in Kansas, Colorado, and Nevada. Following the EPA board decision, coal stocks took a material hit on Friday: Peabody Energy declined 8 percent, and Massey Energy and Arch Coal plunged 12 percent. "The single most important thing we could do is to put a price on the CO2 in our economy today," argued Al Gore in September. "Tax what we burn, not what we earn."
NO NEW COAL: Leading climate scientists and activists, from James Hansen to Al Gore, have called for an immediate moratorium on the construction of new coal plants. This past weekend, thousands of youth activists took part in protests against the financing of new coal-fired plants. In September, the Arkansas Commission on Global Warming adopted a recommendation that "no new coal plants be built in Arkansas" until carbon sequestration technology is ready. The Center for American Progress recommends that comprehensive climate change legislation include an emission performance standard for new coal plants which would require these plants to capture and store their CO2 emissions, with a crash course to develop the new technology. Investments in new coal technology are needed to mitigate its risks, but they will not be major job creators. Most of the dollars invested in coal go to capital-intensive efforts such as mining and plant construction that generate few jobs. In contrast, the "green economy" -- based on retrofitting buildings, mass transit, energy-efficient automobiles, wind power, solar power, and cellulosic biomass fuels -- creates many more jobs. Joanna Spalding, the Sierra Club attorney who successfully argued the case, remarked, "This decision gives the Obama Administration a clean slate to begin building our clean energy economy for the 21st century."

http://liveearth.org/


With Live Earth India http://liveearth.org/india/ only a few weeks away, many events and recent news reports emphasize why addressing our current climate crisis now is so significant. We invite you to join us!

Governors' Global Climate Summit

http://site.governorsglobalclimatesummit.org/Summit_Overview....

On November 18-19, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will bring international leaders together to "find and implement new and creative solutions to address climate change through regional and global action." You will be able to observe the Governors' Global Climate Summit http://site.governorsglobalclimatesummit.org/Summit_Overview.... via web stream at http://www.uctv.tv/climate. Get a first hand look at "climate leaders" working together to find climate solutions to vital issues and to discuss a possible "global agreement on climate solutions that prevent the world passing the 'tipping point' as described by the IPCC."

Al Gore's 5 Step Plan to Clean Energy


http://liveearth.org/2008/11/al-gores-5-step-plan-to-clean-en...

Al Gore recently introduced http://liveearth.org/2008/11/al-gores-5-step-plan-to-clean-en... a five-point plan that "...would simultaneously move us toward solutions to the climate crisis and the economic crisis-and create millions of new jobs that cannot be outsourced." The two major crises we currently face can be alleviated by investing and giving incentives to work towards renewable energy in 10 years, create a smart grid to distribute that energy and to regulate emissions that are emitted.

To learn more about this 5-point plan and to watch Mr. Gore's presentation click here. http://liveearth.org/2008/11/al-gores-5-step-plan-to-clean-en...

Part 1: Al Gore’s Speech


Part 2: Al Gore talks with Tim O’Reilly and John Battelle


Part 3: Q&A; with Al Gore


Learn more about Gore’s plan at http://www.repoweramerica.org/.

Friends of Live Earth India



http://liveearth.org/india/

Live Earth India http://liveearth.org/india/ is happening in Mumbai on December 7th. The show will be broadcast throughout Asia live on the STAR networks, and will be streaming live and available on demand on MSN worldwide. How can you be part of what's happening in India? Host a Friends of Live Earth http://liveearth.org/2008/10/friends-of-live-earth/ event on or around December 7th... and educate yourselves and your friends about how India can help change the world and solve the climate crisis.

This is the first installment of our new "Transition Report" series, highlighting important developments related to climate action as President-elect Barack Obama assembles his team and sets his governing priorities.

We will use these Transition Report updates to keep you informed as the climate debate heats up.

Love it or hate it? Sound off in the Green Room. http://blogs.edf.org/greenroom/2008/11/13/your-thoughts-on-th...




November 13, 2008

Dear Environmental Defense Fund Activist:

Forward this Transition Report to friends and family to keep the discussion going.


You say you want a Climate Action Mandate?

According to an election night national poll sponsored by Environmental Defense Fund that's exactly what the new President has.

The poll found a majority of Americans believe that given the current economic crisis, now is the time to address climate change—because investing in clean energy will create millions of new jobs and rebuild the economy.

The survey, conducted by respected Democratic pollster Douglas E. Schoen, also found that two-thirds of Americans think investments in economic stimulus should be funded with revenue from large companies paying for the global warming pollution they emit—rather than tax hikes or more borrowing that increases the national debt.

A Clear Message

The public thinks there's not a minute to waste. They want economic revitalization and action to address global warming to go together, and they want it paid for by polluters.

A few of the other poll highlights include:

* 78% of voters think it is very or somewhat important to address the problems of global warming and climate change, while 22% do not.
* 35% of voters think it is most important for Congress to pass a plan that creates new jobs by investing in renewable energy projects. This compares with 26% who said expanding health care coverage is most important and 23% who said regulating the financial services industry should be the top priority.
* 50% of voters said that our oil addiction and economic problems are linked and should be dealt with together, compared with 26% who said we must deal with our oil addiction now and only 13% who said we should deal with our economic problems first.

(For full poll results, here is a link to the pdf file. http://www.edf.org/documents/8778_EDF%202008%20Election%20Day... )

It's clear that the public no longer buys the tired argument that economic progress and environmental protection are at odds with one another.

That should serve as a warning to those who plan to try marshaling old scare tactics when the climate debate starts back up in January.

Our single-minded goal for 2009 is to leverage this transformational opportunity into real change.

EDF scientists, economists and policy experts are already deeply engaged in the rapidly evolving conversation.

It's going to be one heck of a year. We'll use regular Transition Report updates to keep you posted.

Thanks for all you do,
Sam Parry
Director Online Membership and Activism

P.S. What do you think? Sound off in the EDF Green Room http://blogs.edf.org/greenroom/2008/11/13/your-thoughts-on-th... – our online soapbox for the EDF Action community.

OurFuture.org

Dear Campaign for America's Future Supporter:

If you will be in the DC area, please join us for an event on November 18th hosted by the Campaign for America's Future to explore real investment in America, during which U.S. Representatives Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey, Co-Chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus - and Representatives Keith Ellison and Rosa DeLauro will be speaking.

The need for increased public investment in our country is apparent. America is literally falling apart and falling behind. Our bridges are collapsing and our schools are overcrowded. We no longer lead the world in broadband speed and coverage. America’s WW2-era infrastructure is breaking down.

In the short term, in the deepening recession, the first task is to put people back to work. Investment in rebuilding should be the first priority of any recovery agenda. In the long term, we need sustained expansion of our investment in our future. It is time for a new green deal.

We will meet to detail the scope of the challenge, and the elements of an adequate response. We’ll look at the investment needs, the economic benefits, and ways of financing increased investment over the longer term.

Click here to see the full agenda and RSVP. http://ga3.org/caf/events/investconfrsvp/details.tcl

The conference will feature leaders from the business community and organized labor. Progressive Caucus co-chairs Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey will chair the discussions. Economist James Galbraith will provide the keynote address at lunch. Pollster Stan Greenberg will present a new, election-night survey of what voters wanted when they went to the polls, and how they feel about investments, deficits and spending priorities. Progressive caucus members will describe ways to finance expanded investment.

Click here to see the full agenda and RSVP. http://ga3.org/caf/events/investconfrsvp/details.tcl

* WHEN: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 - 9:00 am to 2:00 pm (Lunch will be provided.)

* WHERE: Washington, DC - Library of Congress, Jefferson Building, LJ119 (Immediately behind the Capitol, enter on the ground floor below the tourists’ entrance).

* RSVP: Click here to see the full agenda and RSVP http://ga3.org/caf/events/investconfrsvp/details.tcl

We look forward to seeing you on November 18th.

Thank you so much,

Eric Lotke, Research Director
Campaign for America's Future

======================================================
Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this.
Tell-a-friend! http://ga3.org/caf/events/investconfrsvp/tell-a-friend.tcl

If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for Campaign for America's Future. http://ga3.org/caf/join.html?r=PdNiw6KqrCEsE

Tell Fish and Wildlife Service: Gray Wolves Need Protection!

Click here to Take Action http://action.earthjustice.org/campaign/wolf_delist_1108?rk=M...

Dear Wildlife Advocate:


http://action.earthjustice.org/campaign/wolf_delist_1108?rk=M...
Click to Take Action
http://action.earthjustice.org/campaign/wolf_delist_1108?rk=M...

Just when you thought gray wolves were safely back on the endangered species list, the Bush administration has launched another 11th hour attack to strip them of federal protections.

Following its recent failed attempt to remove the wolves from the endangered species list, the administration's Fish and Wildlife Service has issued a proposal allowing Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana to kill nearly 1,000 wolves -- at a time when the wolf population is already declining.

Please tell the Fish and Wildlife Service to keep the northern Rockies gray wolves on the Endangered Species list. http://action.earthjustice.org/campaign/wolf_delist_1108?rk=M...

Last July, in response to an Earthjustice lawsuit, a federal judge ruled that the Fish and Wildlife Service's efforts to delist gray wolves in the northern Rockies were illegal, citing numerous flaws with the proposal.

But rather than fix any of the original proposal's problems, the Fish and Wildlife Service has instead rushed this flawed proposal out for public comment.

We aren't surprised by these last-minute shenanigans, and as always we're prepared to mount an aggressive legal challenge to protect the northern Rockies gray wolves.

Stripping the wolves of their federal protections would reinstate wolf hunts in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana, and we need your help to make sure that doesn't happen. http://action.earthjustice.org/campaign/wolf_delist_1108?rk=M...

We want wolves to recover to the point where they can come off of the endangered species list -- much like the success with the American bald eagle -- but we want to see them come off under the right conditions.

This means taking steps to halt the current wolf population decline, increasing the population to at least 2,000-3,000 wolves, ensuring genetic exchange between Yellowstone's wolves and wolves throughout the northern Rockies, and creating a legal safety net for wolves to prevent states from killing hundreds of wolves after delisting.

We can achieve true wolf recovery if we are willing to make further recovery progress, not go back to 19th century wolf eradication policies.

Right now, though, we need you to tell the Fish and Wildlife Service that you oppose delisting the gray wolves.

Please tell the Fish and Wildlife Service to drop its proposal to delist the wolves. http://action.earthjustice.org/campaign/wolf_delist_1108?rk=M...

With your help, we will ensure that the gray wolves keep the protections necessary to their survival.

Take action today! http://action.earthjustice.org/campaign/wolf_delist_1108?rk=M...

-Earthjustice
Because the earth needs a good lawyer

P.S. Every voice counts! Please tell a friend, family member, or colleague to take action! http://action.earthjustice.org/campaign/wolf_delist_1108/forw...


©2008 Earthjustice | 426 17th Street, 6th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612 | 510-550-6700 | action@earthjustice.org

Visit your subscription management page to modify your email communication preferences, update your personal profile or remove yourself from ALL email lists maintained by Earthjustice.

Powered by:

Dear Environmental Activist:


http://action.edf.org/campaign/EPA_regulate_global_warming
Urge EPA to fight global warming.
http://action.edf.org/campaign/EPA_regulate_global_warming

One of the first, defining decisions facing President-elect Obama's Environmental Protection Agency is whether to heed the Supreme Court and regulate global warming pollution under the Clean Air Act.

We have an opportunity right now to shape that decision.

Send an email to the EPA today http://action.edf.org/campaign/EPA_regulate_global_warming supporting strong action under existing law to protect human health by reducing global warming pollution.

More Background

EDF is pushing hard for comprehensive climate legislation as an essential step in slowing, stopping and reversing the catastrophic threats of run-away global warming.

Crafted properly, such legislation would cap and reduce America's global warming emissions and create economic incentives to spur green energy innovation that would grow the economy and create jobs.

Passing global warming legislation is critical, but there's another way to get action:

The EPA can use the tools it already has under the Clean Air Act to start reducing global warming pollution right now.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that carbon dioxide is a "pollutant" under the Clean Air Act. Way back in April 2007, the Court told the EPA to get to work on regulating carbon dioxide.

But under pressure from the White House, the EPA has taken a go-slow approach.

After months of foot-dragging, the EPA is now asking for public comments. That's where you come in.

Send an email today http://action.edf.org/campaign/EPA_regulate_global_warming : Urge the EPA to use existing law to reduce America's global warming pollution.

The public comment deadline is November 28, 2008, so please act now.

Opponents of global warming action are flooding the EPA with comments opposing action. We can't let them get the upper hand.

The EPA needs to hear from you that it should take strong action under existing law to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

Send an email today to make sure the EPA hears from us. http://action.edf.org/campaign/EPA_regulate_global_warming

Thanks for support and activism. It makes a huge difference.

Sincerely,
Environmental Defense Fund Action Network