Arctic National Wildlife Refuge under threat after Bush win 12 November 04

here is a Natural Resource Defense Council website that has a petition to be send to the president & your reps arguing against ANWR oil drilling: http://www.nrdc.org/land/wilderness/arctic.asp

Environmental Defense has a Global Warming: Undo It! campaign petition that needs more “signatures” at: http://actionnetwork.org/ct/qpqBMV613BP_

Finally, below is the letter to my priest, which you can use as a model for writing to your pastor, bishop, or local pastors and bishops of your area. A friend suggested to me that Catholic clergy are so wrapped up in the abortion issue to the exclusion of all else, because that is one sin they cannot be found guilty of, and it is so much easier to point the finger at other sinners than to look at the three little fingers point back to one’s own sins. I hope that is not the case. I hope most are sincerely pro-life, which means they should sincerely mount a very strong campaign against global warming and other environmental harms, once they understand them better.

Keep up the courage and the struggle, my friends. Lynn

---

November 15, 2004

Rev. Fr. _

RE: Runaway Global Warming

Dear Rev. Fr. :

In recent weeks I have become aware of new evidence indicating possible runaway global warming, a situation that may threaten all of life on earth. As you know I am very concerned about the death and destruction from environmental harms, as I know are you. In fact, you are the only pro-environment parish priest I personally know of. In 1990 right before Ash Wednesday I saw a TV program, “Is It Hot Enough For You?” about global warming, then read a 1987 article in Science that showed how the precipitation belt had been shifting over several decades from the Sahelian-Sudanian belt of Africa to Europe, causing greater droughts in Africa, including those going back to the 1960s, and greater flooding in Europe. They suggested that it fit the global warming model, if it ever reached scientific certainty. In addition to global warming causing increased droughts and floods, I also learned that global warming causes heat deaths (in Europe nearly 20,000 heat deaths in 2003), severe cyclones and storms, sea-level rise (Tuvaluans are evacuating their Island paradise and way of life as I write this), spread of tropical diseases, crop damage from pests (from the extra CO2, if not from the warming), and species loss.

My first reaction in 1990, even before scientists reached 95% certainty in 1995, was, “Why don’t they do something about this?” Then it dawned on me (God gave me the grace to understand and accept) that I was the one causing the problem, and that I needed to do something about it. But what? I was caught up in structures of high greenhouse gas emissions, with no visible way out. I spend the entire lent nailed to the cross as the Good Thief next to Jesus, repentant, but unable to come down off that cross and make amends, thinking “It’s more difficult for an average American to get into heaven than for an elephant to go through the eye of a needle.” Though assured that Jesus forgave me in my contrition, I was not a happy camper. Then came Easter, and shortly after that Earth Day. I scanned TV programs & went to an Earth Day Festival searching for ways I could reduce my greenhouse gases and my harm to others. What I found (what God showed me) is that there are very few big things one could do, but mainly many many small things. I thought of St. Therese of Lisieux and her Little Way of Spiritual Childhood, and gradually I developed my Little Way of Environmental Healing. We bought our first compact fluorescent bulb, installed a low-flow showerhead (saving us over $100/year in water & water heating), installed a low-flow toilet, reduced our driving, bought a SunFrost refrigerator (uses 1/10 the energy), and so on. I take a hankie to wipe my hands, rather than using paper towels. Over a 5 year period, taking it step by step, we reduced our greenhouse gas emissions by at least 1/3. After moving to Texas we started buying 100% wind generated energy from Greenmountain Energy (www.greenmountain.com), perhaps reducing our emissions by 2/3+ (over our 1990 emissions). We still have many many small things to do. The big surprise is that we are saving $hundreds every year from these mostly cost-effective measures, and I joyously sing, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and its righteousness, and all these things will be added unto you. Allelulia, Allelulia.”

RUNAWAY GLOBAL WARMING: For the past several weeks, I have become aware of recent data from world monitoring stations of an unprecedented increase two years in a row of atmospheric CO2, unaccounted for by increases in human emissions. This means (1) the carbon sinks (the earth’s plant life) are maxing out and are no longer absorbing half our CO2 emissions; and/or (2) the warming has started releasing more CO2 from natural sources. This may be the feared POSITIVE FEEDBACK loop happening several decades sooner than predicted, whereby warming leads to release of CO2 (& CH4, methane) into the atmosphere, causing further warming, thereby causing further CO2 & CH4 releases, and so on, spiraling out of control. If global warming increases 5-6° C by 2100, as some scientists predict, methane hydrates in the ocean could release massive “burps” of methane, leading to extreme warming, and the world could face 95% extinction of life on earth, as happened 251 million years ago (see When Life Nearly Died, by Michael Benton, 2003). It may even be too late to stop this, but, of course, we must do all we can to stop it, even if hope and time are quickly running out. An article, “Abrupt Climate Change,” in November’s Scientific American, states: “New evidence indicates that global warming should be more of a worry: it could actually be pushing the earth’s climate faster toward sudden shifts”(Richard Alley, 2004, p. 62). There is a wealth of information in respected scientific journals about global warming. I would say that 95%+ of scientists highly qualified to make statements about global warming consider anthropogenic global warming real and harmful. The media, of course, is funded by special interests, such as oil & autos (just look at the commercials), so it is no wonder that they grossly underreport this, and claim more uncertainty than exists. And no wonder many people either know next to nothing about global warming, or think it has been disproved.

HOW MUCH SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY DO WE NEED? I believe, as do the U.S. Catholic Bishops in their statement, “Global Climate Change: A Plea for Dialogue, Prudence, and the Common Good,” that we should not to wait while we study global warming further. We need to stop this dangerous experiment by reducing emissions, so that evidence and certainty about global warming decreases, instead of increases, until there is no evidence. Furthermore, the scientific certainty of global warming is something only the scientists need (and they reached .05 significance or 95% certainty in 1995, according to articles in scientific journals). Scientists need to protect their reputations, or no one will believe them in the future. They want to avoid the FALE POSITIVE – that is, claiming that global warming is happening when it is not happening. We as laypeople depending on the earth for survival should be following the prudent MEDICAL MODEL, seeking to avoid the FALSE NEGATIVE – that is, acting as if global warming is not happening (emitting greenhouse gases as usual, or increasing them), when it is actually happening. In other words, we do not need 95% or 75% or even 50% certainty to start reducing emissions in at least cost-effective ways. Doctors don’t tell patients that they won’t remove the tumor, because there is only 94% certainty that it is cancerous, and they need to wait and see for several years whether it gets to 95 or 99% certainty. As for RUNAWAY GLOBAL WARMING, there is not much certainty at this time (scientists are not sticking their necks out to claim it is definitely upon us), but the threat is so very grave that if we wait for 95% or even 75% certainty it will likely be too late to avert it. We cannot take any risk on this one, not even a 50% or even the 17% risk of Russian Roulette. The possibility of extinction of all life on “Spaceship Earth” or “Planet Ark” is the mother of all pro-life issues. As Tom Hanks in Apollo 13 courageously put it, “Failure is not an option!”

SOLUTIONS: We need to start ASAP, if not yesterday, down that “soft path” described by Paul Hawken and Amory Lovins in Natural Capitalism; these engineers have experience with reducing energy needs of industries cost-effectively by 3/4, sometimes even 9/10. They claim the U.S. could reduce its greenhouse emissions by 3/4 or more, without lowering productivity or living standards, with cost-effective measures and off-the-shelf technology, actually leading to a stronger, healthier economy. I know this is true, since our household has done it (and still could reduce more). I would hope that the Catholic Church at all levels – local parish, diocese, national, Vatican – would mount a strong & vigorous campaign against global warming.

SUGGESTIONS FOR WHAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CAN DO:

1. Make its facilities energy/resource efficient and conservative (I, for one, would be willing to pay a more to facilitate this); 2. Inform church members about the dangers and the moral implications of, and the solutions to, global warming; and 3. Petition government officials to enact legislation to help our society reduce its greenhouse emissions, such as the KYOTO PROTOCOL and CLIMATE STEWARDSHIP ACT.

The Church has been very active on many prolife issues, and needs to remain so. I think a consistent prolife message and campaign, one that includes a campaign against what amounts to eco-genocide, would actually strengthen the prolife efforts in each individual prolife area (abortion, embryonic stem-cell research, etc.).

WIN-WIN-WIN: I see global warming as an umbrella issue. Not only does solving it (by burning less fossil fuels & consuming less products with greenhouse house gas components) save lives & money, but also solves many other problems:

§ Local air pollution; 60,000 Americans die each year just from small particulate matter, not counting the various toxins, such as lead & mercury (Pope, 1995), and local air pollution harms and kills fetuses and small children at a much higher rate (Sram, 1999; Liu, 2003).

§ Acid rain from S2O from coal & NOx from autos, which not only destroys forests, lakes, & soil, but corrodes property & lungs (Luoma, 1988); costs are in the $billions, lives perhaps in the 100,000s.

§ N0x from autos also contributes to stratospheric ozone depletion, leading to cancer deaths, etc.

§ Depletion of nonrenewable and other resources, such as potable water. Recycling resources saves energy, 95% for aluminum (which also saves rainforests where bauxite for aluminum is mined).

§ Dependence on foreign resources, and conflicts over these (plus related expenses & taxes).

§ Health problems from lack of exercise (some walking and bicycling is often good for the health; they also lower crime rates in those areas, and reduce road repairs and taxes for such).

I pray that my beloved Catholic Church become much more actively involved in this issue of global warming. I am sure you could think of many more ideas and programs. We Catholics all need to join in prayer and put our heads together on this one. I know that you are on the same page with me on most of what I have written, but I just wanted you to know about this other serious problem of runaway global warming that is arising.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

CC: Fr. __ (assistant pastor), Bishop _, Texas Bishops, U.S. Biships P.S.: I am attaching excepts of the Bishop’s Statement on global warming.

---

REFERENCES: Alley, Richard B. 2004. “Abrupt Climate Change,” Scientific American 291(5):62-70. Liu, Shiliang, et al. 2003. “Association between Gaseous Ambient Air Pollutants and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes in Vancouver, Canada.” Environmental Health Perspectives 111(14) Luoma, Jon, R. 1988. “The Human Cost of Acid Rain.” Audubon 90(4):16-26. Pope III, C. Arden, et al. 1995. “Particulate Air Pollution as a Predictor of Mortality…” American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 151(3):669?674. Sram, Radim J.n 1999. “Impact Of Air Pollution On Reproductive Health.” Environmental Health Perspectives 107(11)

I just read this in 11/16/04 NYTimes re a new type of environmental magazine:

“Plenty hits the newsstands today and is scheduled to be published six times in 2005. It is aimed, the creators say, with no apparent comic intent, at the “environmental consumer” and promises “smart living for a complex world.” The idea is that you don’t have to be stodgy and self-flagellating to be green. You can buy cool hybrid cars, eat organic food and wear sexy designer clothes. They can be skin tight, or transparent and revealing, as in the case of “Eva’s recycled parachute blouse” in the fashion spread alluringly called “Couture au Naturel.”

“You can be interested in food, design and skiing as well as fossil fuel. For all the apparent frivolity of Abigail’s pose, her image is meant to draw readers to “The End of Oil,” a sober description of what the future holds.

“The magazine has a lot of science and technology, along with travel, fashion and cooking.

---

I’m glad to see that environmentalism is becoming “in” again.

but it also reminds me that it is easier to be environmentally minded when you have some money.

Since it is the rich who do the most environmental harm, then they should spend more upfront to reduce (which will gain them more savings & make them richer).

On the other hand, Hunter Lovins (Rocky Mountain Institute), has said that the poor cannot afford not to be environmentalists. They cannot afford high energy bills, etc. She also said that the nations energy policy comes down to the cracks around your windows. And this reminds me of the yearly crisis in Chicago, where the poor cannot afford their gas bills during winter – in the past gas was shut off and a certain number died each year. It came on the news once that a Chicago woman in a one-bedroom apartment had a gas bill above $400 a month during winter, while ours in a really big 4-bedroom stand alone house averaged $150 in winters (it got to $250 in the very worst month we ever had,with temps way below 0) – and we lived 50 miles inland from the lake and had a colder climate, without the warming “lake effect.” Something is wrong with this picture.

I think if our nation would just help the poor become energy & resource efficient with a tiny fraction of what is being spent on war, we could really solve a lot of problems.

and be as environmentally conservative as we can afford! Thanks Lynn.