Equality Green

Green Experts Academy, San Diego November 16: New... More Leaders To Brief on Success in the Green Economy

2011-10-20T14:37:00.000-07:00

Green Leaders Share Success Strategies, Latest Information • Evolve Your Green Plans and Career • Engage in Public Policy

November 16, 2011 5:30PM-9:00PM

Agenda details and registration:

http://www.greenexpertsacademy.eventbrite.com

Event Hosting Sponsor: Cricket Communications, Inc. $23 plus Eventbrite fee. $30 at the door. Includes catered meal, beverages, and free parking at the venue. Presented by The Connell Whittaker Group LLC

Part I: Leadership Briefings: Ms. Lisa Bicker, Consultant, Former CEO and President of CleanTECH San Diego. David Steel, CEO, US Green Chamber of Commerce. Commissioner Robert Coleman, City of Chula Vista.

Part II: Green Workshop: 7 Steps You Must Take To Grow Your Green Career and/or Business and the Green Economy

(Bring your ideas, plan and/or resume and business cards, for a hands-on workshop to advance your goals)

Part III: Green Policy Brainstorm

• • •

The Green Space and sustainability are the future of the global economy, if we are to overcome the challenges of climate change. What does Green success require, and what does it take to succeed in this emerging sector? Expert Green leaders will speak on this topic, and a hands-on workshop will enable attendees to vet and refine their Green goals. Also, real-time policy engagement via a Green Policy Brainstorm, with results communicated to staff in the San Diego Mayor's Office. Join us for this dynamic event, and come away inspired and empowered to take the next steps to reach your goals!

The November 16th event is supported by our generous Host Sponsor, Cricket Communications, Inc. The seminar and workshop will be held in Cricket's LEED-certified corporate headquarters in San Diego, California. Register Today!

Where: Cricket Communications, Inc. corporate headquarters office, San Diego, California. Training Room, 1st Floor.

Address:

5887 Copley Drive

San Diego, CA 92111

"Success Strategies in the Green Sector During Turbulent Times" is a diversity and equality-friendly event.

CLEANTECH AND GREEN ECONOMY SECTOR LEADERS TO SHARE LATEST INFO ON GREEN JOBS & GREEN ECONOMY SEPT. 15 AT SAN DIEGO SEMINAR

2011-09-13T09:02:00.000-07:00

(San Diego, August 29, 2011) “San Diego CleanTech Beach: Riding The Green Jobs and Economy Wave” http://sandiegocleantechbeach.eventbrite.com is an event that is designed to help people launch or expand clean technology careers, start-ups and community initiatives by providing briefings from leaders in the Green economy sector. The September 15 event is hosted by The Connell Whittaker Group LLC. (see http://www.missiontohumanity.com). The location is San Diego Environmental Services 9601 Ridgehaven Court , First Floor Auditorium, San Diego, CA 92123 (Free Parking) Thursday, September 15, 2011 from 5:30 PM to 8:00 PM (PT)
In the wake of new studies and confusing media reports about the status of the Green economy, many career changers, entrepreneurs, and others are in need of reliable information and networking to help reach their business goals. CleanTech Beach speakers are leaders in the sector and will offer reality-based briefings on the 2011 status of the local and state Green economy.
Speakers and topics include:

6:00-6:20 pm Jacques Chirazi, Office of the Mayor of San Diego, Cleantech Program Manager: “The CleanTECH San Diego Success Story and Jobs Outlook”
6:20-6:40 pm Bill Powers, P.E. Powers Engineering, and Author, San Diego Smart Energy 2020 Distributed Generation Plan: “Insights Into The California Plan for Green Job Growth, and Briefing on Distributed Energy”
6:40-7:00 pm Arun Kumar, MSEE, MBA, LEEP AP, and President, Global Renewable Energy & Power Inc.: “Greening the Globe From The Web: Global Green Job Training and Job Creation From San Diego to India and Beyond
7:00-7:30 pm Emily Young, PhD, Senior Director, Environment Analysis & Strategy, San Diego Foundation: “Findings from the San Diego Foundation Regional Clean Jobs Study, and Building Our Vision for the Future of the Region.”
Event organizer Kathleen Connell of the Connell Whittaker Group stated:
“Recently, the Brookings Institution released a report on the status of our national green economy, which found that 2.7 million Americans work at green jobs. In San Diego, over 810 Cleantech companies have taken root, local entrepreneurs are creating jobs and consumer-focused businesses. Organizations of all types are implementing sustainability and energy efficiency practices, which can also create jobs. Certainly, more needs to be done, but the US Conference of Mayors estimates that the number of green jobs will almost triple by 2040. So, the landscape is shifting, and people need quality up-to-date information and connections to break into the sector. Our event is designed to orient folks about the status of local Green jobs and businesses, and point them to where the action is happening, even as Washington is slow to act, in our view. Attendees will also have the opportunity to ask what can be done to create more jobs and to find out about planning and growth that are already underway in California and San Diego.”
News from ReleaseWire .

Making Green Jobs Equal Jobs

2011-08-01T08:37:00.001-07:00

With new Green and Cleantech companies emerging, there is an opportunity to make sure that a "Green Job is an Equal Job."
Green employers and employees should set a high bar for workplace inclusion, and there is room for improvement. Overall, 60 percent of all corporate employers offer domestic partner benefits, according to HRC. A new study by the Department of Labor shows that DP benefits are actually available to only 20-30 percent of workers overall.

Urging new Green companies to be inclusive can up these percentages as solar and other Cleantech firms are gaining market share in the US economy. You can ask, for example, solar providers about thier diversity policy. The same goes for other companies in the sustainability space. It it's Green, clean and sustainable, a product or service needs to be created in
an equality workplace as well.
---

Source: HRC
"New Data on Domestic Partner Benefits

For the first time, data on domestic partner benefits was included as part of the Department of Labor’s National Compensation Survey (NCS). This is the first time that a federal government survey has asked employers about domestic partner benefits. HRC President Joe Solmonese released the following statement:

The inclusion of domestic partner data in major surveys and studies presents new opportunities to fully understand and address the challenges that LGBT people face.

Offering domestic partner benefits has increasingly become a standard best practice in America's workplaces, with nearly 60% of Fortune 500 companies offering them. The data released in the NCS reflects that progress, but also reminds us that, despite the advances in corporate America, many American workers still lack access to equal benefits for their families. For example, the NCS shows that only 29% of private sector workers have access to health insurance benefits for a same-sex domestic partner, and that number drops to around 20% in the South and Midwest."
---

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Will San Diego LGBT Candidates Lead With Green Jobs and Equality?...Going Beyond Gay...

2011-06-12T11:22:00.001-07:00

Three out of the four viable and/or likely candidates for Mayor of San Diego
are LGBT! The Republican candidates aside, what must happen is that the progressive LGBT candidate ( Christine Kehoe) and Bob Filner-who is not gay but can garner LGBT support- must put job creation-and green job creation- as number one on thier agenda.

Thus the progressive LGBT community is in a unique position to support the green candidate, green job creation for all in San Diego, as well as equal rights. Now that's far reaching Equality Green power, and "beyond Gay" Pride power as well.

Global Warming is hitting poorer countries and our LGBT family there first. We can support them by supporting LGBT candidates who will take action locally on both equality and climate issues as well.
Happy Pride Month!

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

LGBT Humanitarians Help Climate Change Victims: Aid For Twister Communities

2011-05-31T13:41:00.000-07:00

May 31, 2011

A call for action was issued today from the rainbowfund.org. Weather, and in this case, most likely global warming-related tornadoes, have inspired a San Francisco LGBT group to help the survivors. Please donate today at the link below. After all, these are our neighbors and family too.

Source: rainbowfund.org

U.S. Disaster Fund

Beginning in April the United States has been hit by a series of natural disasters resulting in over 425 deaths and $260 billion in property damage.

A violent tornado outbreak from April 25 – 28 produced destructive tornadoes in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. 314 died.

The Mississippi River floods of April and May have left entire towns submerged leaving thousands homeless. Areas in Illinois, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana have been flooded.

On May 22 a tornado hit Joplin, Missouri, it caused wide spread destruction and killed117 people.

At the request of our generous donors, RWF has set up the U.S. Disaster fund.

To make a donation to help the survivors please specify "U.S. Disaster" when donating.

Donate online at http://www.rainbowfund.org/donate

Donate by check by mailing to Rainbow World Fund, 4111 - 18th Street, Suite 5, San Francisco, CA 94114.

New Pew Poll: Red and Blue Alike Support Renewable Energy

2011-05-10T09:15:00.000-07:00

"The Pew Research Center has just released a very interesting study, “Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Typology.” It segments the public into nine groups: eight politically active groups and one inactive group (bystanders) composed entirely of nonvoters. Of the eight active groups, two are described as “mostly Republican” (staunch conservatives and Main Street Republicans), three as “mostly Democratic” (new coalition Democrats, hard-pressed Democrats, and solid liberals), and three as “mostly independent” (libertarians, disaffecteds, and postmoderns). In reality, however, postmoderns lean strongly Democratic, while libertarians and disaffecteds lean strongly Republican. So there are really four active Democratic and four active Republican

In light of this diversity it is interesting to note a couple of areas where almost all of these groups agree. The first is on support for alternative energy. Overall, the public prioritizes developing alternative energy over expanding oil, coal, and natural gas by a 63-29 margin. And, as shown in the chart below, seven of Pew’s eight active typology groups support this position, including a whopping 40-point margin among the Main Street Republican group. Only the staunch conservatives (9 percent of the public) dissent from the rest.

Conservatives usually act like progressive ideas have no purchase in “their” part of the political spectrum. These data suggest otherwise.

General support for tougher environmental protection remains strong as evidenced by the polling numbers cited at the top. A related question found 53% of Americans believe “Stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost” compared to 39% says “Stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy.” Reconciling that with the71% who say they believe “This country should do whatever it takes to protect the environment,” would seem to imply that even some people who think environmental laws and regulations hurt the economy still want tougher environmental protection, which in turn would suggest that the overwhelming majority of Americans are not economists."
Source: Climate Progress)

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Green Jobs Drive Younger Voters...And Older Voters Too?

2011-04-19T11:23:00.000-07:00

Obviously jobs drive voters of all demographics in this era, but 10K young voters, who supported Obama, gathered at Powershift 2011. They are determined to hold him and the country accountable on the climate and green jobs campaign pledges. Older age groups, who, 20 million strong, began Earth Day, are advised to get organized around Green for 2012 as well.
---

Repost and image source: National
Journal.com
"Green Jobs Will Trump Climate Change for Young Voters
By Olga Belogolova | Monday, April 18, 2011 | 6:04 pm.
In November 2008, an estimated 22 million young people came out to vote for President Obama.
Believing in hope, change and a variety of progressive policies, these young people not only made history by electing Obama, but also as the third-highest showing of young voters, according to the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement.
Nearly 40 years earlier, Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Gaylord Nelson chose April 22 as the first Earth Day. The specific day, first dubbed “National Teach-In on the Crisis of the Environment,” was selected to ensure maximum possible participation from college students, as it would not overlap with exams or holidays.
Young people today are saying they plan to hold President Obama responsible for his energy and environment record in 2012.
But with gas prices around $4 per gallon, a fragile labor market and a federal budget deficit that should weigh on their shoulders, many other factors may motiviate young voters.
And climate policy might be one of the last things on that voting agenda.
Nevertheless, in recent days, over 10,000 young people gathered in Washington to train leaders in community organizing and to challenge the administration on energy policy as part of Power Shift 2011.
The young climate activists, describing themselves as the “forgotten Obama voters,” heard from former Vice President Al Gore, former green jobs czar Van Jones and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson, and others over the weekend.
And on Monday, over 5,000 of them gathered for a rally in front of the White House and marched toward Capitol Hill, calling on Obama and Congress to protect the Clean Air Act, reject “dirty energy” sources, and build a clean energy economy.
Organizers of the four-day event said young people are disillusioned with Obama’s slow movement on energy and environment issues.
Following the demise of cap-and-trade legislation in the Senate and this year's push from a Republican-controlled House to upend the EPA's climate rules, young voters were especially disenchanted with Obama’s energy security plan and speech at Georgetown University last month.
“It sounded like something that industry would have written,” said Maura Cowley, co-director of Power Shift, arguing that the Obama’s support of nuclear energy, natural gas, and offshore drilling disappointed many young voters.
The speech prompted an e-mail flurry and “a couple young people said – ‘I just took my `Hope' poster off the wall,’” Cowley said.
Her counterpart, Courtney Hight, co-director of Energy Action Coalition and former Obama campaign staffer, said those disillusioned voters might not show up for the president in 2012.
“We have the votes that brought him in,” she said.
But experts say that Obama’s record on energy issues is neither as bleak as portrayed nor potentially harmful for 2012.
“I don’t know why they should be disillusioned with the guy. He’s doing what he can,” Republican energy strategist Mike McKenna told National Journal.
“The guys blown $100 billion on wind and solar….more than [everybody] else has blown on it combined”
“I think part of being a young activist is that you’re impatient and you should be impatient and we all should be impatient for progress,” added David Axelrod, Obama’s 2012 strategist, saying that progress has been made.
“And there’s no doubt in my mind that whoever is on the other side of the ballet will be much less robust in that regard than us,” Axelrod told National Journal.
“There will be a choice… [and] that will motivate people.”
But the motivation will not necessarily be about climate policy in 2012.
Rock the Vote President Heather Smith said that while candidates shouldn't ignore the concerns of young people, doing so doesn’t mean the youth vote won't show up.
“It’s not ‘We won’t vote for you;’ it’s more ‘We voted for you, so pay attention,’” Smith said.
Though, as the President of Earth Day Network, Kathleen Rogers surely embraces the concept of young people engaged in moving energy and environment policy, she argued that it is a “gigantic mistake” to generalize about young voters.
With young people as the most unemployed age group today, climate change will no longer be the right message on energy issues in 2012, Smith added.
Young voters will be “looking at everything through a jobs lens,” she said. To that end, jump-starting a clean energy economy that creates jobs for these young people will be the most effective way of garnering support for an election campaign.
Jason Skovgard, a senior studying Chemical and Environmental Engineering at UC Riverside, who recently competed with a team for a $75,000 EPA grant, as part of the agency’s People, Prosperity and the Planet Competition, said he “absolutely” wants channel his engineering skills toward developing renewable energy technology.
“I really want to help solve this problem. It’s going to just get bigger,” he said.
Skovgard and teammates Christian Contreras, Marcus Chiu, Steven Chavez, Gregory Hammar, Joon Bok Lee and Trevor Vandergrift created a fuel cell that could generate electricity through a combination of solar power and hydrogen fuel. The University of California Riverside seniors said that they hope to join the clean tech industry when they enter the workforce.
The economic implications of energy policies would resonate most among young people in today’s fiscally focused environment, explained Matt Segal, a young entrepreneur who recently launched Our Time, a membership organization for young Americans.
“It is the most successful argument,” Segal said, adding that the environmental movement would “definitely gain much more momentum when it is tied to an economic argument.”

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

I am Quoted in Grist: Why Are Gays Green

2011-03-27T14:28:00.000-07:00

It bears repeating, or Grist and Unte Reader thought so, I just discovered. In Homo
And Garden (clever) at Grist:
"Kathleen Connell writes in San Diego Gay & Lesbian News, "Our own hampered civil and personal lives mirrors [sic] a disregard for our home planet, which is in crisis from a century of abuse. The mentality that allows desecration of the ecosystem is the same mindset that continues to allow the second-class citizenship of LGBT people everywhere."
Well, that is what I said. Read on for the Grist cross-post. Now why are we Greener?
----
Photo: Jason Pier
A recent poll says gays and lesbians are more likely to support the environment, especially when voting or shopping, and a bigger percentage say they care about sustainability. Here's the breakdown:

55 percent of LGBT adults vs. 33 percent of straight adults say they care a lot about green issues
48 vs. 25 percent consider the environment when shopping
45 vs. 27 percent highly value a political candidate's stance on green issues
25 vs. 17 percent use the environment as a factor when considering a potential employer
Echelon Magazine reported similar findings in 2009: 33 percent of LGBT adults had seen or read An Inconvenient Truth, compared to 20 percent of heterosexuals, and 75 percent of gays believe global warming is happening right now (versus 53 percent of straight adults).

So why are the gays greener? For starters, gay rights and climate change are both human rights issues. Kathleen Connell writes in San Diego Gay & Lesbian News, "Our own hampered civil and personal lives mirrors [sic] a disregard for our home planet, which is in crisis from a century of abuse. The mentality that allows desecration of the ecosystem is the same mindset that continues to allow the second-class citizenship of LGBT people everywhere."

Grist asked those at the helm of several LGBT sites what they thought might be going on:

They're progressive voters in cities. The Advocate Senior Editor Neal Broverman says, "Gay and lesbian people vote progressively, so it seems natural that they would live progressively -- like being 'green,' for example. Also, many LGBT people live in urban areas, which are hotbeds for environmentally conscious ideas and lifestyles."

They're already advocates for social change. Kristin Russo of Everyone Is Gay told Grist, "Despite the fact that 'going green' may not be directly related to issues of sexuality, advocating for change is something with which many in the LGBTQ community have experience." Her partner and site co-founder Dannielle Owens-Reid quips, "It's like, maybe if we focus on going green you won't notice that I'm holding hands with a girl."

They're conscientious. Michael Jensen, editor of After Elton, says, "Growing up gay causes folks to look at the world from the perspective of ... being an outsider. I think that makes people much more aware of how actions ... can affect both other people and, by extension, the environment. We realize how thoughtless actions -- like dropping a homophobic remark without thinking about it -- can hurt a person. So it doesn't seem a leap to be able to know how our actions driving cars and consuming resources can impact the environment."

They're open-minded. Gerod Rody of Out for Sustainability says, "This planet is our home and caring about it is not just a straight-hippie thing anymore ... When I came out, it opened my perspective on the world. I realized how connected we are, whether we like it or not. Once you wake up to your own sexuality there is no going back. The same is true for understanding we can make real progress in the environmental challenges of our time. It may be tough, but together we can see the next generations of kids, whether queer or straight, do more than survive. I know we can see them thrive."

Want more? Here are some resources on same-sex sustainability:

Out of the Closet Queer Sustainability Society, a Victoria, B.C.-based not-for-profit
Green and Gay, a brand-new site highlighting green products from companies supporting LGBT rights
The Advocate on how one biker "aims to spawn a bevy of eco queers"
----

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Go Japan!

2011-03-16T11:36:00.000-07:00

Maddowblog.com says the loose translation in the cartoon above is "Do Your Best, Japan". In other words, "Go, Girl!".

We need to take this moment and do our best to kick nuclear and dirty energy to the curb.
Please install solar and energy efficiency, and reject nuclear, coal and oil. Let your friends know where you stand! Go Green, Girl!

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Scott Walker Shuts Down Clean Energy Jobs In Wisconsin

2011-02-23T11:54:00.001-08:00

Cross-post from CAP and Climate Progress.

"Newly elected Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker held an event called “Wisconsin is Open for Business” the day he was inaugurated. But every move the governor makes shows him to be an antibusiness, anti-innovation politician intent on running the state into the ground.

Let’s take clean energy. Clean energy industries offered a glimmer of hope during the past two years in the midst of a national recession that has hit the Midwest particularly hard. In Michigan, for example, total private employment dropped 5.4 percent from 2005-2008, while during the same period employment increased by 7.7 percent among the state’s 358 “green” firms. Michigan’s new governor, Rick Snyder, recognized the growth potential of these industries when he ran on a 10-point plan that emphasized the need to invest in clean energy sectors such as advanced batteries.

In Ohio, too, the green writing is on the wall. New Gov. John Kasich initially sounded off against clean energy, running on a platform that included rolling back the state’s renewable energy standard. But he reversed this position soon after his election when multiple business leaders told him how important green industries were in the Toledo area in particular. The city, which ranked in the bottom 10 by per capita income in 2000, has seen a renaissance as a hub for solar innovation and production. Over 6,000 individuals are employed in these industries in Toledo today, and the city is home to several major solar panel exporters including First Solar and Xunlight.

Gov. Walker, however, has apparently decided that Wisconsin should take a back seat to the Midwest’s green renaissance. The state has enormous potential to generate homegrown energy from renewable resources. Wisconsin has enough wind, solar, and biomass energy resources to produce power equivalent to the entire state’s electricity needs according to Environment America. But the new governor recently proposed a wind turbine siting law that would effectively shut down most wind power production. The new law, if put into effect, would require wind turbines to be set back at least 1,800 feet from any nearby property unless all affected property owners agree to the turbine in writing.

Only one-fourth of Wisconsin’s current wind turbines would ever have been built if this rule had been in place in the past. In other words, 2,250 fewer people would have construction or maintenance jobs, over a million fewer dollars would be flowing to rural communities in the form of land leases, and the 21 manufacturing plants in the state that supply the wind industry would have far fewer orders and would likely be closing their doors.

Gov. Walker is also taking aim at another potential growth sector: high-speed rail. Right now no passenger rail exists between Madison and Milwaukee, which between them house over 75 percent of Wisconsin’s entire population. A high-speed train running between the cities would serve commuters and business travelers, and it would provide a critical influx of visitors to both downtowns. It would also connect Madison to the existing Milwaukee-Chicago train route. Perhaps most important, studies have shown that the line would create over 13,000 jobs, eliminate 780,000 car trips annually, and save Wisconsin residents 2.76 million gallons of gas each year.

Investing in high-speed rail makes sense in Wisconsin. The state’s major university and state capitol are in one major city, but the majority of industry and commerce is in another. Connecting the two would be a major investment in Wisconsin’s future growth.

But Gov. Walker doesn’t see it that way. One of his first acts once in office was to defund the proposed rail line, turning down over $800 million in federal funds to support the project. That’s a lot of lost jobs today and lost revenue tomorrow.

Gov. Walker clearly wants to cut off Wisconsin from the clean tech revolution. But his job-killing, anti-innovation strategies don’t stop at clean energy. Over the past two weeks it has become clear that the governor wants to cut off the state’s entire public-sector workforce at the knees by using a budget battle as an excuse to take away these workers’ basic right to band together and bargain for better working conditions and fair wages.

This isn’t about the state budget. In fact, Wisconsin’s public-sector workers make about 8 percent less in wages than do workers in the private sector who have similar education and experience. And the state’s pension fund has an actuarial funding ratio—the ratio of actuarial assets as compared to liabilities—of nearly 100 percent. That means that the contributions to the state’s pension fund are sufficient to meet the needs of its retirees—in other words, Gov. Walker’s attempt to make this into a budget issue is a red herring.

Gov. Walker’s proposed state budget cuts are instead a transparent attack on public-sector unions, which are a major reason anyone even takes public-sector jobs anymore. Why work a job for less pay than you’d make in the private sector—an extremely demanding job like teaching in public schools or plowing two-foot drifts of snow in minus-20 degree weather—if that job doesn’t provide the stability, health and safety regulations, health and retirement benefits, and basic equality that come with being part of a union?

Gov. Walker undermines the state itself when he undermines public-sector workers. These workers provide essential services that are the backbone of the state’s economy. They educate children. They keep streets clear of snow and garbage. They process permits, cut through red tape, and keep essential city and state services moving.

Take away the benefits these workers have today—benefits that they have bargained for in exchange for lower pay than they might get elsewhere—and the quality of all these services goes way down. The result is a state with worse schools, worse public services, and an educated workforce fleeing to find a better deal elsewhere. In short, a state where no one wants to invest, start a new business, or make a new start."

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Vegan...Ellen is on to something

2011-02-04T13:13:00.000-08:00

Recently for health benefits our house went vegan, or on a plant based diet. The benefits are enormous and fairly immediate from weight loss to artery self healing and much much more.
Check out "The China Study" for details on benefits. Power vegans from CEO's, to Hollywood. including Ellen, and Bill Clinton are on this diet for a very good reason.

It was only a bit into this that I began to realize after my research just how enormous the impact of plant based diet shifts would have on massive reduction of GHG output. Per the UN and Scientific American...more than transportation or industry! This could be something that is very affordable and has immediate personal and community benefits, with huge impacts but we never talk about it the Green sector as a major thrust. Time to go heat up the vegan chilie which tastes just fine... Friday thoughs...Kathleen
" the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), our diets and, specifically, the meat in them cause more greenhouse gases carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide, and the like to spew into the atmosphere than eithertransportation or industry."
- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Clean Energy "Party"-- Are We Invited?

2011-01-22T12:21:00.001-08:00

An idea is gaining traction. Move from Green education to getting folks involved in electing Green Candidates in 2012. I started trying this out with the SASC and CCSE Green Candidates Forum here in San Diego last fall. Will supporting Green candidates who
are "moderate" (see below) include support for LGBT issues? Is Green enough? Not really, IMHO. But we must do something serious on climate, as Washington is failing us and the planet. No planet, no equality.
http://www.grist.org/article/2011-01-03-new-year-new-idea-for-climate-the-american-clean-energy-party

- Kathleen Connell

Brown Appoints Gay Green As Natural Resources Head

2011-01-06T14:52:00.000-08:00

Great news!

Source bar.com
"This week Governor Jerry Brown confirmed reports he would name John Laird, one of the first openly gay men to serve in the state Legislature, as his secretary of the Natural Resources Agency.
It was the first in what is expected to be several high profile LGBT appointments by Brown, who took his third oath of office as the state's top official Monday, January 3.
Laird, 60, represented Santa Cruz in the Assembly for six years before being termed out of office. He lost a bid last summer for a coastal state Senate seat.
Should he be confirmed by the state Senate to the position, Laird will oversee policies that cover everything from logging and water to state parks and farming issues. A longtime environmental activist, Laird is expected to be a vocal opponent of offshore oil drilling, which he fought against when he served as a city councilman and mayor of his hometown.
In Sacramento, Laird helped push through the state's cutting edge climate change law known as AB 32, which regulates greenhouse gas emissions and has been fiercely opposed by oil companies. He was also a main voice for protecting Sierra forests, water conservation and renewable energy while in the statehouse.
Laird is the fifth out person to be appointed to a state position in recent weeks. Prior to his leaving office, former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced he had selected four openly gay or lesbian people for state boards and commissions."

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

California Business Push For Lower Emissions

2010-12-15T14:13:00.001-08:00

Connell Whittaker Group
LLC is pleased to be a signator to this effort.
---
California Business Owners and Entrepreneurs
Urge Air Board to Adopt Strong Emissions Trading Program
Sacramento, CA - December 15, 2010 - More than 125 small/mainstream businesses, cleantech companies and business associations - representing tens of thousands of employees around the state - issued a letter today urging the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to adopt a proposed emissions trading program (also known as cap and trade) that will reduce carbon, grow the economy, and create jobs, with the goal of creating a better future for all Californians. The ARB Board will hold a hearing on the program tomorrow in Sacramento.
"We encourage ARB to adopt the proposed market system that levels the playing field between dirty and clean energy, provides business owners with new opportunities to grow their businesses, and spurs the transition to a low carbon economy," the letter states. "Reducing carbon and increasing efficiency improves the bottom line for our state and for our businesses, giving us a competitive advantage and protecting us from volatile fossil fuel spikes and economic price shocks."
The business leaders who signed the letter support adoption of the market-based emissions trading program as a mechanism to stimulate innovation and efficiency, and to help position the state as a global leader on advancing clean energy technologies. The letter was signed by businesses from all geographic regions of the state including: owners of print shops, restaurants, construction firms, and landscape companies; CEOs of and investors in solar and renewable companies; leaders of chambers of commerce and business associations; and more.
Business leaders, investors and, most recently, the electorate have shown strong support for the adoption of effective standards by ARB to implement the state's landmark clean energy law (AB 32) to create jobs, improve air quality, grow clean energy resources, and save consumers and businesses money. And new polling from last week http://www.next10.org/next10/pdf/trading/Statewide_Poll_Results.pdf reinforces the fact that voters strongly support moving forward to implement the next phase of AB 32.
The full text of the letter is available at: http://www.ca-greenbusinessalliance.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Business-Support-Ltr_Emissions-Trading-Prog.-Dec-10.pdf.
EDITORS: Business leaders will be available at the hearing tomorrow for comment. Please call the media contact to arrange interview.
# # #

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Holiday Musings: What IS the citizen to do about climate in 2011

2010-12-04T15:45:00.000-08:00

Yup, everyone needs a break, and some festivities this month. But what will you and your family and friends give back to the Earth in 2011? What climate action will be on your resolutions list? Here is some thinking to get you started on figuring out what is the most effective climate action you can include in your life, even as you support DADT repeal and our other equal rights issues. Happy Holidays!

Source: Climate Progress
"The topic for this weekend’s open thread comes from Climate Hawk Auden Schendler, Vice President of Sustainability at Aspen Skiing Company. He wrote on Grist:

Today I got a call from a rock concert producer. “We care about climate. We want to get the audience to act. What is the call to action?” This is a deceptively simply question, but it’s also THE question of our age. Meanwhile, I’ve been asked “what should I do?” by audience members, by seatmates on the plane, but nonprofit heads, by pro athletes.

And the answer has been blown–and continues to be blown–by the best of the climate crusaders. Gore blew it after Inconvenient Truth when the film listed a bunch of personal actions (he did include writing your senator) that won’t add up to much in the absence of policy action. Most nonprofit action lists blow it: drive your Prius, change the bulbs. Even those who don’t blow it, and know that this is about getting policy in place, and now after the election it’s about grassroots mobilizing and reaching policymakers with a message that supporting climate action is OK, even those groups blow it because “write your senator” really isn’t cutting it either. Maybe too few people are writing effectively, leaning too heavily on boilerplate sign-ons. Maybe they’re overwhelmed by the fossil fuel industry’s money. But it’s not cutting it.

So I’m asking you: when you give your talk, or host your concert, or talk to friends, or go home to your family: what is the call to action? I’ve had a stock answer that I’ve used, but I’m not sure it’s good enough. My answer is that you need to become a civic actor with the biggest club you can find. How? Get a bottle of bourbon, sit down, and think deeply, preferably with a friend, about what your biggest lever is. Obviously, if you’re Obama, that’s easy. You need to mobilize the nation on this issue. (He’s not doing it.) If you’re a senator or a policy maker, it’s easy too. Advance legislation. But what if you’re an average citizen? I believe even the most average of the average citizen has a big lever they aren’t aware of. Even if you’re a grandmother stuck at home, you can HAND WRITE a letter to a senator or a corporate leader. That’s easy. But most people have even bigger opportunities: a chance to join a town council, for example, or a planning and zoning board. From there, you could change building codes, or put in place a carbon tax locally. (Both have happened in many towns throughout the US.) In my area, you can run for the board of the electric utility, and drive them towards greener power. But people don’t do either of the last two options, typically, because they are so godawful boring and hugely time consuming. But that is just the point: solving climate is going to hurt. It’s going to be painful. And it won’t be sexy. Being on the planning and zoning board of Nowhereville is going to be living hell. Dumb people are going to hold forth for half an hour at a time. Other people are going to repeat what the person before them said for ten minutes at a time. You’ll be there for hours every session, with green brain fluid running out of your ears. It won’t be nearly as much fun as going dancing. But you’ll move the ball forward in ways you never imagined possible, you’ll be a real footsoldier in the most important war ever fought, and you’ll drop that crippling feeling of powerlessness you carry around with you like a stone.

Ok, that’s my best effort. But what is yours? What’s the call to action on climate, for the average person? How should the rock concert organize itself to best activate the audience? Do they all target James Inhofe with text messages, and make it so well known that they’re targeting that climate trog that it gets national press? Do they get Jim Hansen or Bobby Kennedy to speak? What do they do? What do we ask of the average citizen? During the civil rights movement, what was the call to action?"

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Animal Protein As Bad As Fossil Fuels Says UN

2010-11-22T14:41:00.000-08:00

Wish us well. Jaye and I are entering month two of a full on transition to Vegan. More on LGBT Power Vegans, Divias and Hotties later on down the road. One good reason is the planet. Veg Awards 2010 says:

"Global Powerhouse
In June, the United Nations Environment Program released a report calling for a worldwide shift away from animal products, stating that a plant-based diet was the best way to save the planet from world hunger and the impact of climate change. The report states the only sustainable diet is one rich in plant-based foods and details the damaging and far-reaching effects of eating animals, declaring that factory-farming practices are as harmful to the environment as burning fossil fuels."

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

The Invisible War

2010-11-13T12:41:00.001-08:00

Every veterans day I feel I was a part of a slow motion war in San Francisco ( and elsewhere) that is never honored. It could be called The War against GIRDS. Around 1981 AIDS, a mystery disease, began to create sudden, horrible deaths in San Fran. I want to acknowledge the fallen and the wounds of the survivors. There is a great more to say about it than I am going to say here, but the war analogy has been reported by survivors and studied by academics. As our friends died, the right wing placed Prop 64 on the ballot, which proposed to place gays in concentration camps. Reagan never said the words AIDS. We were all we had, and we lived in a shelled shocked world. Every week we opened the BAR newspaper and looked at the obituaries. Searching for friends, honoring strangers by taking time to read thier life stories.
To read one man's experiences google Uncle Donalds Castro and read his discription and memories. There are foreign wars and domestic wars and this one deserves it's own public acknowledgement. (Image Credit: Uncle Donalds Castro).

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Warming Is A Moral Crisis Equal To Civil Rights, Slavery Says NASA's Jim Hansen

2010-11-09T12:09:00.001-08:00

As I have said in other Op-Eds, it will do us no good to attain our equality, only to be swept aside by global warming. Yes gay people will survive. But in the struggle for survival, our 2nd class citizenship will not position us to thrive or be a social priority.
Dr. Jim Hansen was given The Blue Planet award by Japan recently. His view, as perhaps the globes greatest and most activist climate expert, is that to not act now is a form of a intergenerational crime against humanity of the highest, or lowest, order. Our next generation will pay a horrific price in a global warming catastrophe, as he discusses in his book, Storms of My Grandchildren.
Many of us in the Stonewall Generation did it all for the next generation. This era requires a new marriage of our civil rights with the struggle for planetary protection. It seems daunting, but it can and must be done. And enviros must take the high ground and support the moral imperative of equality for all, in order to gain our support. Support the Green movement needs in the face of a very right wing, anti-

science, anti-nature, and anti-gay strategic thrust being acted on by the Republicans and Tea Party movement. We can, as a friend said recently, turn thier power against them by a united coalition of the very people they disdain. For the present and the next generation.

Vote CCSE: Teach Green to San Diego Kids

2010-11-08T19:05:00.000-08:00

You can vote for CCSE, a huge community resource that is Greening our community! The Next Gen needs Green Literacy so please take a minute and follow the 3 steps below to bring $250K to our region from Pepsi Refresh. Thanks!

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.
Source:CCSE
Subject: [SASC_Forum] Vote for the Green Learning Adventure for San Diego kids

Hello SASC folks!

I am writing to enlist your help. CCSE has been running a free, hands-on education program for San Diego area schools for about a year. It has been funded by Sempra and Walmart and friendly folks like yourself through our raffle and special events in 2010, and that has enabled us to bring the Green Learning Adventure to middle schools across the county this year, reaching more than 8000 students with interactive lessons and information about what students can do in their lives and at home to conserve energy and water, reduce waste and implement other sustainable practices.

The program is easy for teachers to bring to their classrooms and we have a number of teacher testimonials about how well the students respond. We are very excited to build upon its success and bring the Green Learning Adventure to many more schools in 2011. To that end, we applied for a Pepsi Refresh grant. Since we launched on November 1 we have managed to move from 250th place to 115th and slipped back today to 124th. I know it seems low, but we can see that the votes count and I am hoping you can help us and mobilize your network to help us.

Any one person can vote for this project up to three times a day and San Diego will be successful if we can get as many people voting as persistently as possible. Can you help us? The directions are here and below. THANK YOU!

HELP SUPPORT FREE EDUCATION!
We are trying to win $250,000 for kids in San Diego. Vote each way, every day during November! It’s free, and you will get no spam messages from Pepsi when participating.
Help us go viral, please reach out to your contacts and get them to vote!

1. Text (104095) to 73774 (Pepsi will respond to your message but they do not send subsequent messages or market to your phone)

2. Go to http://www.energycenter.org/vote and create an account

3. Go to www.energycenter.org/vote and log in via Facebook

Best regards,

Siobhan
CCSE San Diego

No Apologies from Nancy Pelosi

2010-11-06T07:22:00.000-07:00

Nancy Pelosi At The HRC Annual Dinner

One of our best hopes going forward for federal LGBT legislation in the Republican controlled House is Nancy Pelosi. As a home town San Franciscan, I know she has done more than most in Congress for the gay community. She is also pro environment. This means in turn she is pro health. The LGBT community faces many health challenges because of our oppression...HIV( where is the cure?), Breast cancer, and stress related disease. All of this is mitigated by clean air, and in general, the curbing of global warming. I am pleased to see Nancy is hanging in and will run for leadership of the Dems in the House to deal with all of these issues, and clean tech job creation as well.
Her quotes here in Playbook/Politico are spot on.
"--NO APOLOGIES -- E.J. Dionne interviewed Pelosi: "[E]verything she said made clear that she's not ready to allow millions of dollars in Republican attack ads to drive her from public life. She wants another crack at winning electoral vindication for a record she believes stands well on the merits. ... Republicans always look for a liberal they can target, she said, and for decades, the choice was the late Edward M. Kennedy. ... 'Now they didn't have him,' she adds. 'To some extent they did this with Mrs. Clinton for a while. ... Now you take a woman and a progressive and you put it together. ... Because I'm effective. ... It's why they had to do it. They had to put a stop to me because we were effective in passing health-care reform, which the health insurance industry wanted to stop; Wall Street reform, which Wall Street wanted to stop; [reforms of] students loans ... I'm one of the most effective fundraisers that the Congress has had . . . because I believe in something. ... What made a difference in the election is the fact that they said we are spending money, and where are the jobs?" "

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Time To Hang Together

2010-11-03T15:59:00.001-07:00

HRC election summary below. Equality Green says...it's time for us to hang together. Or we will hang seperately.
Source: HRC
"Since 2006, the U.S. House has been led by committed supporters of equality. But yesterday, a wave of anti-LGBT radicals seized control. Their leaders – Reps. Boehner (R-OH), Cantor (R-VA), and Pence (R-IN) – all received scores of zero on HRC's congressional scorecard, meaning they've NEVER supported a single pro-equality bill. Key Senate seats were lost as well.

In Pennsylvania, arch-conservative Pat Toomey beat the staunchly pro-equality Joe Sestak, and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal leader Rep. Patrick Murphy lost his seat. Longtime LGBT rights champion Sen. Russ Feingold lost to multi-millionaire Ron Johnson in Wisconsin. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, who's called homosexuality a "dysfunction" and "personal enslavement," continues as a U.S. Representative. See our analysis of yesterday's most critical races »

But there were major victories last night as well. A record number of openly LGBT candidates prevailed, including newly elected David Cicilline (D) of Rhode Island, Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO), and Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA). The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) spent millions to gin up hatred and fear, and although they ousted three Iowa judges who ruled for marriage equality, many of their favored candidates lost – like Tea Party darlings Christine O'Donnell in Delaware (who founded a group to "cure" homosexuality) and Sharron Angle in Nevada (who refused donations from pro-equality companies), as well as Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman in California and Carl Paladino in New York. The man who likened homosexuality to alcoholism, Colorado's Ken Buck, also went down in defeat.

The upside is that we are now better positioned to win marriage equality or other forms of family recognition in multiple states. HRC's Campaign for New York Marriage helped pick up three state senate seats, building significant momentum for a marriage equality vote. Maryland re-elected Governor O'Malley, who has committed to signing a marriage bill, and flipped a key state Senate Judiciary Committee seat. In California, Hawaii, Rhode Island and Colorado, pro-equality governors will take office.

These elections also proved again that pro-LGBT candidates don't lose because of their belief in equality. New Hampshire voters rejected the bigotry and hate of NOM and other anti-equality forces and re-elected Governor John Lynch, who signed marriage equality legislation last year."

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

We Did It: Prop 23 Fails

2010-11-03T10:46:00.001-07:00

Prop 23 is dead! I met many LGBT folks who were and are key motivators and leaders and organizers in this broad state-wide coalition. Thanks to all of you for
just saying no to the dictates of big oil. Media Release from the Dirty Energy coalition:
Proposition 23 Fails in Resounding Victory for California Economy and Clean Energy Future

SAN FRANCISCO – Voters in California soundly defeated Proposition 23 today, delivering a decisive and historic victory for the state’s clean energy economy, clean air and climate policy.

The defeat of the Dirty Energy Proposition signifies the first and largest public referendum in history on clean energy policy. With today’s election, California voters cemented their state’s role as a trailblazer for clean energy policy across the country and worldwide. Today’s results also signal an important triumph for the broad coalition that stood up to out-of-state oil refiners who sought to unravel California’s groundbreaking clean air law to protect their own profits.

“In the midst of a major economic downturn, and with a barrage of fear mongering and scare tactics, voters still said they want a clean energy future,” said Tom Steyer, co-chairman of the No on 23 campaign.

The campaign brought together leaders from the environmental, health, labor, business, clean technology and national security sectors, along with community groups, faith-based organizations and more. The co-chairmen of the Stop Dirty Energy Proposition effort, Steyer and former Reagan-era Secretary of State George Shultz, are leaders within their parties and are emblematic of the unlikely allies that banded together to defeat Proposition 23.

Shultz said this sweeping coalition must continue to work together to urge California’s newly elected officials to carry out voters’ wishes to continue to invest in the clean energy economy. “This is the new face of the clean energy economy. This broad coalition will continue to push for California to be on the cutting edge in building the new energy economy,” Shultz said.

Economists say California’s leadership in curbing pollution already has attracted jobs to the state and will lead to hundreds of thousands more in the clean energy sector, one of the few growing areas of the sputtering economy.

“Voters understand clean energy jobs already exist and offer the best promise for economic growth. They recognize that we can have a clean environment and a healthy economy,” Steyer said.
- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Carbon Emissions: Bully Of The Planet

2010-10-29T14:10:00.000-07:00

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

As an LGBT family we have our hands full. Surviving bullies in school and discrimination at work. Not being allowed to create marriages and equality in our families. And of course DADT. At the same time we are green leaders so don't forget to vote your enviro values too. Here are 12 facts from EDF to remember on Election Day. Generally, a pro LGBT candidate is also a fairly green candidate. And of course a Democrat. Finally, to not have a Gulf mega- disaster here in CA, and to support our green economy, vote no on Prop 23 and 26.
---
12 Environmental Facts to Keep in Mind on Election Day

389 – The concentration in parts per million of carbon dioxide, a leading greenhouse gas, in the earth's atmosphere today.

38 – Percent increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration since the industrial revolution.

18 – Number of countries that have set all-time heat records so far in 2010.

82 – Percent decline in U.S. corn, cotton, and soybean production possible under current warming scenarios.

1 – Rank of 2010 so far as the hottest year on record (tied with 1998).

16 – Estimated number of Exxon Valdez-sized spills it would take to equal the amount of oil spilled into the Gulf after the BP Blowout.

4,342 – Total number of oiled birds collected by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the Gulf Coast region.

$68.5 million – Amount spent by Big Oil and its special interests allies this year on TV ads designed to elect pro-polluter candidates.

$514 million – Amount spent on lobbying and advertising by big polluters to stop the Senate from passing global warming legislation.

23,000 – Number of Americans whose lives will be saved in 2010 alone because of the Clean Air Act, according to EPA estimates.

232 – Number of toxic chemicals found in the umbilical cord of tested newborn babies in the U.S.

1 – The number of votes it takes to decide a close election.
------------------

Save CA Coast Yes On 21!

2010-10-25T11:32:00.001-07:00

We all love our San Diego coast, and so does the rest of the world, which consistantly names San Diego among the best places in the world.

Cross-post Ocean Conservancy:
"

I'm voting YES on Prop. 21 because it will ensure long-term protection of California’s most beautiful and spectacular habitats and wildlife, including our iconic coast.

In case you haven't heard about it yet, Prop. 21 is a statewide ballot initiative that will provide a stable, adequate source of funding to restore and maintain California's ailing state parks, and protect our iconic coastal beaches along with the new system of marine protected areas for which we've fought so hard. That's why, at Ocean Conservancy, we've joined an unprecedented coalition of more than 450 businesses, civic, and conservation organizations supporting Prop. 21 – you can learn more about Prop. 21 here.

But the most important thing you can do is vote YES on Prop. 21—either by absentee ballot NOW, or at the polls on November 2.

Three decades of chronic underfunding for our 278 state parks and beaches has lead to a system that has deteriorated to the point of collapse, accumulating a $1.3 billion maintenance backlog. A fresh and stable source of funding is essential to maintain our magnificent park system and safeguard California's new underwater parks, our marine protected areas, which you have been instrumental in helping us create over the past several years.

Prop. 21 is a clear solution to the crisis facing our state parks. The initiative not only dedicates the new funds solely to state parks and wildlife conservation, it also guarantees all Californians free day-use admission to all state parks and beaches—and that's something from which ocean-lovers like you and I can surely benefit.

Please join me by voting YES on Prop. 21: The State Parks and Wildlife Conservation Trust Fund Act."

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

10,000 Clean Energy Companies in CA At Risk From Prop 23

2010-10-23T16:17:00.001-07:00

Cisco, which employs many LGBT folks, says No to Prop 23, and points to research that shows there are 10,000 clean tech companies in innovative California. No wonder then that Valero and dirty oil profiteers want to turn off the green innovation agent that is California. Haven't voted? No on 23 and 26, a related stalking horse on the ballot.

Source: Cisco Blog

Californians know how to invest in the future. Believing in our collective ability to drive towards positive change, Cisco urges Californians to vote No on Prop 23.

For decades, California has led the way when it comes to addressing global warming in the US with a proven track record of not only achieving impressive results, but also stimulating investment in new businesses and technologies creating thousands of new jobs. From California's imposition of stricter-than-federal tailpipe emissions regulations to its global leadership in increasing energy efficiency per unit of GDP growth, Californians know how to address societal challenges in ways that increase economic prosperity. By investing in the future, not living in the past, California can and should do both.

Doing both means that you we look at challenges as opportunities, you evaluate threats by thinking about them differently. Doing both rejects "zero sum" thinking in favor of collaborative decision-making. It is inherently optimistic, as I believe most Californians are. So when some assert that California can not afford to carry through on its climate commitments without losing jobs, I can't help but ponder the possibilities of doing both.

On the ballot in November, Proposition 23 would roll-back California's greenhouse gas law (AB 32), low-carbon fuel standard, and rules requiring utilities to source 33% of their electricity from renewables by 2020.

According to the Pew Charitable Trust, California leads the nation in production of clean, renewable energy and as of 2007, is home to more than 10,000 businesses in the clean energy sector, supporting more than 125,000 jobs. California has been able to attract billions of investment capital in the recent years, which will be negatively affected if Prop 23 passes. Adoption of Prop 23 would jeopardize California's leadership in innovation, create uncertainty among business in California about the state's commitment to build a green economy, compromise capital investment and put clean technology jobs at risk.

Addressing climate change and protecting California's environment are important business and societal priorities; not only affecting our quality of life, but also California's ability to attract and retain clean tech investment and jobs. Government, private industry and individuals are all responsible for safeguarding California's future. Passage of Prop 23 would go against our state's innovative culture of investing for the future, jeopardize our leadership position in attracting clean tech investment, and vacate the possibility of doing both.
------

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

No On 23 Business Press Conference Tomorrow

2010-10-20T15:11:00.001-07:00

***ADVISORY ***
San Diego Business Leaders to Urge Voters to Reject Prop. 23

WHAT:
San Diego business leaders will gather Thursday to urge voters to vote “No” on Proposition 23. The ballot measure financed by Texas oil companies would devastate the region's fast-growing clean energy economy. San Diego is home to more than 670 clean tech companies, generating billions in local economic growth and thousands of jobs.

WHO:
Lisa Bicker, President and CEO, CleanTECH San Diego
Scott Sporrer, Vice President and General Manager, Siliken USA
Joshua Weinstein, Managing Partner, AMSOLAR Corp.
Lane Sharman, Managing Partner, Solana Energy

WHEN:
TOMORROW, Thursday, October 21st at 1:30 P.M.

WHERE:
Embarcadero Marina Park North
400 Kettner Blvd
The park is where Kettner Blvd dead-ends. Press conference will be near the gazebo
Television Producers/Photographers: The event will feature five solar panels for visuals.

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Our Stories: No On Prop 23

2010-10-18T10:43:00.001-07:00

Cross Posting. Check out this moving video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3gWEGwTfAI
Share this with your friends and fellow californians ... very moving.

http://www.prop23voices.org collecting voices like yours ... which fully inspired me and Three Old Friends to make this happen. Thank you.

--
Kindest Regards,

Lane Sharman 858-755-2868
Defend California. Say NO to Texas oil companies trying to kill our state's clean energy jobs and clean air standards.
Vote No On Proposition 23
California: http://www.stopdirtyenergyprop.com
San Diego: http://groups.google.com/group/san-diego-region-against-proposition-23

- Kathleen Connell, M.A.

Prop 23 To Be Voted On In SD: Call Your Rep Monday Morning

2010-10-17T16:37:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow, Monday, Oct 18, the City Council of the City of San Diego will
vote on a resolution opposing proposition 23. This is important because San
Diego is the second largest city in the state and because San Diegans are in
the process of deciding how they will vote. A resolution opposing prop 23
will get media attention. Six other cities in San Diego County have already
led the way by passing opposing resolutions including Chula Vista, Del Mar,
Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Oceanside and Solana Beach. Also, the Carlsbad
city council will vote on their resolution in a few days.

Please help to ensure passage of this important resolution to oppose Prop 23
by as many council members as possible by taking 2 minutes to email or call
your council member.. If you have 10 minutes, call or email all four that
have not stated a position yet. Feel free to post to facebook or email
friends to do the same.

1) Call or email your council member by noon on Monday.

a. These council members have not yet indicated they oppose Prop 23.
Please ask them to, and to support the resolution (suggested language
below).

* Carl DeMaio (619) 236-6655
carldem...@sandiego.gov

* Kevin Faulconer (619) 236-6622
kevinfaulco...@sandiego.gov

* Ben Hueso (619) 236-6688 benhu...@sandiego.gov

* Sherri Lightner (619) 236-6611
sherrilight...@sandiego.gov

b. These council members have formally opposed Prop 23. Please thank
them and tell them you're counting on their vote for the resolution.

* Marti Emerald (619) 236-6677
martiemer...@sandiego.gov

* Donna Frye (619) 236-6616 donnaf...@sandiego.gov

* Todd Gloria (619) 236-6633
toddglo...@sandiego.gov

* Anthony Young (619) 236-6644
anthonyyo...@sandiego.gov

2) Come to the meeting and support our speakers by holding a sign. 2
PM at City Hall, 202 C Street, 10th Floor. MAP
<http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&ll=32.717074,-117....
&spn=0.009902,0.021662&z=17&iwloc=0004929a67c8224f6d48a&msid=102052966727658
154672.0004929a64e34046c3546> . Trolley to Civic Center.

The language below is intended for council members who have not yet come out
against prop 23. If you write those that have please thank them for their
position first.

Thank you for your help! If you have questions contact me at 619-335-1265 or
mdisenho...@cox.net.

Masada

Dear Councilmember ,

I urge you to support the resolution opposing Proposition 23 at the City
Council meeting on Monday, Oct. 18.

Proposition 23 would be devastating for San Diego and California's clean
energy industry which saw growing numbers of jobs even through the recession
and which has brought billions of capital investment funds to the state.
Prop 23 would also increase our air pollution, already the worst in the
country, and drive up energy costs for our businesses and families.

Please join the cities of Chula Vista, La Mesa, Del Mar, Solana Beach,
Oceanside and Imperial Beach, as well as dozens more throughout the state,
in standing up to the Texas oil companies and opposing Proposition 23.

I am counting on you to vote yes on this important resolution.

Sincerely,
your name

Never Forget

2010-10-07T17:25:00.001-07:00

Stonewall Inn 1969

Happy LGBT History Month. Kathleen
(GLT Times)" Some forget that the first of the riots were kicked off by a lesbian who was struggling to escape after a raid by the cops. She was able to get away from the cops and this was what finally set the crowd of gays, transsexuals and drag queens off. Leo E. Laurence wrote, “Pigs were loading her into the wagon when she shouted to a big crowd of bystanders: ‘Why don’t you guys do something!’ and that’s what did it! The riots lasted for days and marked the start of the GLBT movement."

- Kathleen Connell, Equality Green

Laboring: Life On The Global Assembly Line

2010-09-06T10:00:00.001-07:00

Happy Labor Day. Here is an article by Barbara Ehrenreich and Annette Fuentes from the Ms. Archives. I am quoted. This economy works for fewer and fewer of us today, but there are things we can do if we organize.

Life on the Global Assembly Line (1984)
by Barbara Ehrenreich and Annette Fuentes
Ms. Spring 2002

Every morning, between four and seven, thousands of women head out for the day shift. In Ciudad Juárez, they crowd into ruteras (run-down vans) for the trip from the slum neighborhoods to the industrial parks on the outskirts of the city. In Penang they squeeze, 60 or more at a time, into buses for the trip to the low, modern factory buildings of the Bayan Lepas free trade zone. In Taiwan, they walk from the dormitories-where the night shift is already asleep in the still-warm beds-through the checkpoints in the high fence surrounding the factory zone.

This is the world's new industrial proletariat: young, female, Third World. Viewed from the "first world," they are still faceless, genderless "cheap labor," signaling their existence only through a label or tiny imprint-"made in Hong Kong," or Taiwan, Korea, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, the Philippines. But they may be one of the most strategic blocs of womanpower in the world. Conservatively, there are 2 million Third World female industrial workers employed now, millions more looking for work, and their numbers are rising every year.

It doesn't take more than second-grade arithmetic to understand what's happening. In the U.S., an assembly-line worker is likely to earn, depending on her length of employment, between $3.10 and $5 an hour. In many Third World countries, a woman doing the same work will earn $3 to $5 a day.
And so, almost everything that can be packed up is being moved out to the Third World: garment manufacture, textiles, toys, footwear, pharmaceuticals, wigs, appliance parts, tape decks, computer components, plastic goods. In some industries, like garment and textile, American jobs are lost in the process, and the biggest losers are women, often black and Hispanic. But what's going on is much more than a matter of runaway shops. Economists are talking about a "new international division of labor," in which the process of production is broken down and the fragments are dispersed to different parts of the world, while control over the overall process and technology remains safely at company headquarters in "first world" countries.

The American electronics industry provides a classic example: circuits are printed on silicon wafers and tested in California; then the wafers are shipped to Asia for the labor-intensive process by which they are cut into tiny chips and bonded to circuit boards; final assembly into products such as calculators or military equipment usually takes place in the United States. Garment manufacture too is often broken into geographically separated steps, with the most repetitive, labor-intensive jobs going to the poor countries of the southern hemisphere.

So much any economist could tell you. What is less often noted is the gender breakdown of the emerging international division of labor. Eighty to 90 percent of the low-skilled assembly jobs that go to the Third World are performed by women in a remarkable switch from earlier patterns of foreign-dominated industrialization. Until now, "development" under the aegis of foreign corporations has usually meant more jobs for men and-compared to traditional agricultural society-a diminished economic status for women. But multinational corporations and Third World governments alike consider assembly-line work-whether the product is Barbie dolls or missile parts-to be "women's" work.

It's an article of faith with management that only women can do, or will do, the monotonous, painstaking work that American business is exporting to the Third World. The personnel manager of a light assembly plant in Taiwan told anthropologist Linda Gail Arrigo, "Young male workers are too restless and impatient to do monotonous work with no career value. If displeased, they sabotage the machines and even threaten the foreman. But girls? At most, they cry a little."

A top-level management consultant who specializes in advising American companies on where to relocate, gave us this global generalization: "The [factory] girls genuinely enjoy themselves. They're away from their families. They have spending money. Of course it's a regulated experience too-with dormitories to live in-so it's a healthful experience."

What is the real experience of the women in the emerging Third World industrial work force? Rachael Grossman, a researcher with the Southeast Asia Resource Center, found women employees of U.S. multinational firms in Malaysia and the Philippines living four to eight in a room in boardinghouses, or squeezing into tiny extensions built onto squatter huts near the factory. Where companies do provide dormitories, they are not of the "healthful," collegiate variety. The American Friends Service Committee reports that dormitory space is "likely to be crowded-while one shift works, another sleeps, as many as twenty to a room."

Living conditions are only part of the story. The work that multinational corporations export to the Third World is not only the most tedious, but often the most hazardous part of the production process. The countries they go to are, for the most part, those that will guarantee no interference from health and safety inspectors, trade unions, or even free-lance reformers.

Consider the electronics industry, which is generally thought to be the safest and cleanest of the exported industries. The factory buildings are low and modern, like those one might find in a suburban American industrial park. Inside, rows of young women, neatly dressed in the company uniform or T-shirt, work quietly at their stations. There is air conditioning (not for the women's comfort, but to protect the delicate semiconductor parts they work with), and high-volume piped-in Bee Gees hits (not so much for entertainment, as to prevent talking).

For many Third World women, electronics is a prestige occupation, at least compared to other kinds of factory work. They are unlikely to know that in the United States the National Institute on Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has placed electronics on its select list of "high health-risk industries using the greatest number of toxic substances." If electronics assembly work is risky here, it is doubly so in countries where there is no equivalent of NIOSH to even issue warnings. In many plants toxic chemicals and solvents sit in open containers, filling the work area with fumes that can literally knock you out. "We have been told of cases where ten to twelve women passed out at once," an AFSC field worker in northern Mexico told us, "and the newspapers report this as 'mass hysteria.'"

Some of the worst conditions have been documented in South Korea, where the garment and textile industries have helped spark that country's "economic miracle." Workers are packed into poorly lit rooms, where summer temperatures rise above 100 degrees. Textile dust, which can cause permanent lung damage, fills the air. Management may require forced overtime of as much as 48 hours at a stretch, and if that seems to go beyond the limits of human endurance, pep pills and amphetamine injections are thoughtfully provided. In her diary (originally published in a magazine now banned by the South Korean government) Min Chong Suk, 30, a sewing-machine operator, wrote of working from 7 a.m. to 11:30 p.m. in a garment factory: "When [the apprentices] shake the waste threads from the clothes, the whole room fills with dust, and it is hard to breathe. Since we've been working in such dusty air, there have been increasing numbers of people getting tuberculosis, bronchitis, and eye diseases. Since we are women, it makes us so sad when we have pale, unhealthy, wrinkled faces like dried-up spinach. It seems to me that no one knows our blood dissolves into the threads and seams, with sighs and sorrow."

In all the exported industries, the most invidious, inescapable health hazard is stress. Lunch breaks may be barely long enough for a woman to stand in line at the canteen or hawkers' stalls. Visits to the bathroom are treated as privileges. Rotating shifts-the day shift one week, the night shift the next-wreak havoc with sleep patterns. Because inaccuracies or failure to meet production quotas can mean substantial pay losses, the pressures are quickly internalized; stomach ailments and nervous problems are not unusual.
As if poor health and the stress of factory life weren't enough to drive women into early retirement, management actually encourages a high turnover in many industries. "As you know, when seniority rises, wages rise," the management consultant to U.S. multinationals told us. He explained that it's cheaper to train a fresh supply of teenagers than to pay experienced women higher wages. "Older" women, aged 23 or 24, are likely to be laid off and not rehired.

The lucky ones find husbands. The unlucky ones find themselves at the margins of society-as bar girls, "hostesses," or prostitutes.

There has been no inter- national protest about the exploitation of Third World women by multi-national corporations-no thundering denunciations from the floor of the United Nations' General Assembly, no angry resolutions from the Conference of the Non-Aligned Countries. Sociologist Robert Snow, who has been tracing the multinationals on their way south and eastward for years, explained why. "The Third World governments want the multinationals to move in. There's cutthroat competition to attract the corporations."

The governments themselves gain little revenue from this kind of investment-especially since most offer tax holidays and freedom from export duties in order to attract the multinationals in the first place. Nor do the people as a whole benefit, according to a highly placed Third World woman within the U.N. "The multinationals like to say they're contributing to development," she told us, "but they come into our countries for one thing-cheap labor. If the labor stops being so cheap, they can move on. So how can you call that development? It depends on the people being poor and staying poor." But there are important groups that do stand to gain when the multinationals set up shop in their countries: local entrepreneurs who subcontract to the multinationals; "technocrats" who become local management; and government officials who specialize in cutting red tape for an "agent's fee" or an outright bribe.

In the competition for multinational investment, local governments advertise their women shamelessly. An investment brochure issued by the Malaysian government informs multinational executives that: "the manual dexterity of the Oriental female is famous the world over. Her hands are small, and she works fast with extreme care. . . . Who, therefore, could be better qualified by nature and inheritance, to contribute to the efficiency of a bench-assembly production line than the Oriental girl?"

Many "host" governments are willing to back up their advertising with whatever brutality it takes to keep "their girls" just as docile as they look in the brochures. Even the most polite and orderly attempts to organize are likely to bring down overkill doses of police repression:

In Guatemala in 1975 women work-ers in a North American-owned garment factory drew up a list of complaints that included insults by management, piecework wages that turned out to be less than the legal minimum, no overtime pay, and "threats of death." In response, the American boss called the local authorities to report that he was being harassed by "Communists." When the women reported for work the next day they found the factory surrounded by two fully armed contingents of military police. The "Communist" ringleaders were picked out and fired.
In the Dominican Republic in 1978, workers who attempted to organize at La Romana industrial zone were first fired, then obligingly arrested by the local police. Officials from the AFL-CIO have described the zone as a "modern slave-labor camp," where workers who do not meet their production quotas during their regular shift must stay and put in unpaid overtime until they do meet them, and many women workers are routinely strip-searched at the end of the day. During the 1978 organizing attempt, the government sent in national police in full combat gear armed with automatic weapons. Gulf & Western supplements the local law with its own company-sponsored motorcycle club, which specializes in terrorizing suspected union sympathizers.
In Inchon, South Korea, women at the Dong-II Textile Company (which produces fabrics and yarn for export to the United States) had succeeded in gaining leadership in their union in 1972. But in 1978 the government-controlled, male-dominated Federation of Korean Trade Unions sent special "action squads" to destroy the women's union. Armed with steel bars and buckets of human excrement, the goons broke into the union office, smashed the office equipment, and smeared the excrement over the women's bodies and in their hair, ears, eyes, and mouths.
Crudely put (and incidents like this do not inspire verbal delicacy), the relationship between many Third World governments and the multinational corporations is not very different from the relationship between a pimp and his customers. The governments advertise their women, sell them, and keep them in line for the multinational "johns." But there are other parties to the growing international traffic in women-such as the United Nations' Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the World Bank, and the United States government itself.

UNIDO has been a major promoter of "free trade zones." These are enclaves within nations that offer multinationals a range of creature comforts, including: freedom from paying taxes and export duties; low-cost water, power, and buildings; exemption from whatever labor laws may apply in the country as a whole; and, in some cases, such security features as barbed-wire, guarded checkpoints, and government-paid police.

Then there is the World Bank, which over the past decade has lent several billion dollars to finance the roads, airports, power plants, and even the first-class hotels that multinational corporations need in order to set up business in Third World countries.

But the most powerful promoter of exploitative conditions for Third World women workers is the United States government itself. For example, the notoriously repressive Korean textile industry was developed with the help of $400 million in aid from the U.S. State Department. Malaysia became a low-wage haven for the electronics industry thanks to technical assistance financed by AID and to U.S. money (funneled through the Asian Development Bank) to set up free trade zones.

But the most obvious form of United States involvement, according to Lenny Siegel, the director of the Pacific Studies Center, is through "our consistent record of military aid to Third World governments that are capitalist, politically repressive, and are not striving for economic independence."

What does our government have to say for itself? According to AID staffer Emmy Simmons, "we can get hung up in the idea that it's exploitation without really looking at the alternatives for women. These people have to go somewhere."

Anna, for one, has nowhere to go but the maquiladora. Her family left the farm when she was only six, and the land has long since been bought up by a large commercial agribusiness company. After her father left to find work north of the border, money was scarce for years. So when the factory where she now works opened, Anna felt it was "the best thing that had ever happened" to her. As a wage-earner, her status rose compared to her brothers with their on-again, off-again jobs. Partly out of her new sense of confidence she agreed to meet with a few other women one day after work to talk about wages and health conditions. That was the way she became what management called a "labor agitator" when, six months later, 90 percent of the day shift walked out in the company's first south-of-the-border strike.

Women like Anna need their jobs desperately. They know the risks of organizing. Beyond that-if they do succeed in organizing-the company can always move on in search of a still-docile, job-hungry work force. Yet thousands of women in the Third World's industrial work force have chosen to fight for better wages and working conditions.

One particularly dramatic instance took place in South Korea in 1979. Two hundred young women employees of the YH textile-and-wig factory staged a peaceful vigil and fast to protest the company's threatened closing of the plant. On the fifth day of the vigil, more than 1,000 riot police, armed with clubs and steel shields, broke into the building where the women were staying and forcibly dragged them out. Twenty-one-year-old Kim Kyong-suk was killed during the melee. It was her death that touched off widespread rioting throughout Korea that many thought led to the overthrow of President Park Chung Hee.

So far, feminism, first-world style, has barely begun to acknowledge the Third World's new industrial womanpower. Jeb Mays and Kathleen Connell, cofounders of the San Francisco-based Women's Network on Global Corporations, are two women who would like to change that: "There's still this idea of the Third World woman as 'the other'-someone exotic and totally unlike us," Mays and Connell told us. "But now we're talking about women who wear the same styles in clothes, listen to the same music, and may even work for the same corporation. That's an irony the multinationals have created. In a way, they're drawing us together as women."

Saralee Hamilton, an AFSC staff organizer says: "The multinational corporations have deliberately targeted women for exploitation. If feminism is going to mean anything to women all over the world, it's going to have to find new ways to resist corporate power internationally." She envisions a global network of grass-roots women capable of sharing experiences, transmitting information, and-eventually-providing direct support for each other's struggles. It's a long way off; few women anywhere have the money for intercontinental plane flights or even long-distance calls, but at least we are beginning to see the way. "We all have the same hard life," wrote Korean garment worker Min Chong Suk. "We are bound together with one string."

- Posted using BlogPress mobile by Kat

5 Years Later: Remembering Our Florida Katrina

2010-08-26T16:10:00.000-07:00

5 years ago today, we were cleaning up after Florida's Katrina, and glad to be alive.

An alleged minor (Category 1-2) hurricane, Katrina, first made landfall a mile from our home in Fort Lauderdale, Florida on August 25th, at 5:00 pm. For 6 or more hours, 8 metal posts, still attached to the roof, acted as battering rams. These poles pounded 6 sliding glass doors ever two minutes at 90 miles an hour or more at the entire back of our home, like disciplined warriors pounding on the ramparts of a castle under siege. It seemed like they were living creatures, enraged by wind and rain, trying to get at us, with a ceaseless assault on the glass. My partner and I were inside the house, and to this day, I do not understand why or how the sliding glass doors did not breech, allowing a hurricane to come inside. Had that happened, the consequences of 90 MPH hurricane winds in the living room are pretty unthinkable. At least 15 people died in Florida by the time Katrina was done with the sunshine state.

As we cleaned up the mess on August 26th, after a sleepless night, we were aware that Katrina was working it's way across the state, and heading into the Gulf. Soon, we and the nation watched in horror as our unwanted visitor blew up over warm Gulf waters and surged into to devastate an unprepared and unprotected New Orleans.
Our Katrina, Katrina The Younger, I call it, was part of the 50 named storms of the 2004 and 2005 storm season. In Broward county, the 2005 season culminated with another direct hit by hurricane Wilma, a Category 3. That huge storm pressurized our attic, and we were hunkered down in the dark house for many terrifying hours. We lived for weeks after Wilma with no power, no gasoline at the pumps, and a worthless FEMA. We got by with our friends, one generator that a father of friend shipped down from a Wisconsin dairy farm for us. There weren't any generators left in the south by the time Wilma blew into town. Neighbors came by in the morning in to warm up their breakfasts. Friends scoured local grocery stores, also without power, for edible main courses for candle lit dinners. Meanwhile, hapless officials were still pulling body bags out of New Orleans. That could have been us, we thought. We lived in one room, with a fan, and were delighted to have this luxury.

Fast forward to today in San Diego. My family and I are part of self-selected, unorganized climate diaspora. I know there are millions of folks around the earth, relocating and uprooting to get out of the way of hurricanes and other climate-related extreme weather. We are out here, somewhere in the world, and don't have an organization or Washington lobbyists, yet. Our only voice is the United Nations, and no one seems to be listening in Washington, as another year-the hottest on record- passes without significant climate legislation.
50 storms and 2 hurricanes were enough for us, and we could not figure how to afford escaping a storm surge, should one ever appear with the next hurricane. The housing bubble had put two story, storm-worthy homes out of reach. We put our cherished waterfront home on the market and made plans to return to California, leaving our beloved "Fort La De Da" and Wilton Manors behind, with a great deal of regret.

By this point, between storms, I had read enough climate change literature to know what the new storm risks were, risks that far exceeded the historical norm. In 2005 science debates, scientists were alarmed by Katrina and the dramatic upswing in storms. Yet the old guard was dismissing the notion that climate change was impacting hurricane behavior. My intuitive conclusion after so much accidental field work living in a a strike zone was that the answer was "yes, global warming is a factor." Today there is no debate among the vast majority of legitimate scientists that increased sea surface temperatures, atmospheric moisture and other dynamics are creating more and stronger mega-storms. Personally, I had hit my 2 hurricane limit.

I guess things are better today. 5 years ago, global warming was not a generally acknowledged fact in 2005, and certainly not by the Bush Administration. From that perspective, we have come a long way as a globe as and a nation under Obama, and we are indebted to Al Gore for naming and claiming global warming. Sustainability is now a household word, and has become embedded in some policy (not nearly enough), business plans and personal choices. Jim Hansen's 350PPM is a number with life or death meaning for a civilization in peril, but lots of us are aware of it, 5 years hence. Personally, encouraged by a NASA mentor, I came out of it all determined to devote the rest of my career to mitigation of this unprecedented challenge to humanity and our companion biosphere.
The truth is, while our lives are not as tough as the many of the current former residents of New Orleans, we are still rebuilding our lives on every level as well, in this unspoken Depression, post- Katrina, and post-Bush world. We watch every documentary on Katrina, and for me it is like cinematic therapy, allowing us to witness and overcome our own traumas and post-storm loss. We relate. We relive and release our storms. Katrina is not over for us, New Orleans, the US, or the nation. 5 years later, I realize it never will be. It was a Before and After experience. In a very real sense, the menace of a Katrina has only just begun for everyone. Acidic oceans. 20 million homeless in Pakistan. Melting ice sheets. And in San Diego, a cool summer that other cities suffering temperature highs would love to have. A lot has happened in just 5 years.

In 2005, we were just canaries in the climate coal mine. And yet, lucky indeed.

Ethics...Go Ahead, Borrow: Greens Could Take a Page From The LGBT Book

2010-08-17T11:22:00.000-07:00

Image: Christian Science Monitor
The case for Greening the country is not doing well in Washington legislation, and has been advanced on the basis of economic self-interest. Is this strategy working? No.
A good deal of the progress in LGBT civil rights, women's rights and anti-racism struggles have been fought on the basis of ethics, combined with economics and job creation. Martin Luther King Jr., Harvey Milk, Cesar Chavez, Gandhi, and a host of civil rights leaders led millions to engage not just on the legal or economic frontier, but by standing on the moral high ground. Should we be talking about the ethics of a world in crisis?
20 million in Pakistan are made homeless by climate-related floods, Moscow residents fled a city choked by fire, and other extreme weather/climate events dominated this hottest global summer. Should we be pointing out that dirty energy campaign contributions that are killing the planet are unethical, and should be refused by candidates? Should we "out" dirty energy politicos, whoever they are? LGBT folks certainly work hard to point out homophobic companies which are biased, and at root, that is an ethical argument. Can Greens learn from the ethical strategies and tactics of grassroots leaders of other movements? I say they can, and must. The discussion of ethics-as-strategy in Greendom has begun, along with a realization that Green leadership needs to organize, not just negotiate their way to mitigating global warming. If more so-called minority groups, were at the big Green table, the learning curve on the importance of ethics in strategy would probably be faster, too.

Source: Read more at climate ethics
We would like now to explain in greater detail why taking the ethical reasons for support of climate change policies off the table in the debate about climate change is tantamount to a soccer team unilaterally taking the goalie out of the net. In other words, a case can be made that the ethical arguments are actually much stronger than self-interest based arguments at least in some very important ways. Therefore the failure to make the ethical arguments for climate change policies should be a concern because such failure has practical consequences.

Meet Me In Hillcrest

2010-07-26T12:32:00.000-07:00

Image: Judy Garland Singing The Trolley Song in "Meet Me In St. Louis." She Was So Green!

I live by UC San Diego, and I love the lovely La La Jolla area, Dahlings, and having seals for neighbors. However, it is isolated from my tribe in Hillcrest, and our very pretty and lively downtown, except by I-805 and I-5. Driving is a slow, smoggy, expensive bore, often. We simply have no truly viable mass transit, from north to south in San Diego, unless you want to broil to a crisp waiting for an occasional bus at stops without shelters. No, thank you. The coaster train is wonderful, but has few stops.
The local planning entity, SANDAG, is hooking us up by approving a new trolley, which connects to other mass transit at Old Town. Assuming they get $600M! BTW, I don't care for the phrase "mass transit." How about something more clang, clang, clangish like the Judy Garland Trolley. See actual trolley map

Source: Signonsandiego.com

"As expected, the SANDAG board of directors this morning selected the route for a $1.2 billion extension of the San Diego Trolley north from Old Town to the UCSD campus and University Town Centre.
The new 11-mile trolley route is expected to be in operation in early 2015. Conservative estimates expect 20,000 riders per day, comparable to the Green Line which services San Diego State University and the Mission Valley shopping centers...
...Elyse Lowe, executive director of Move San Diego, endorsed the trolley selection but said serious consideration is needed to the bus routes that serve the densely populated coastal area."

Proud to Vote No on Proposition 23 (SDGLN Cross Post) July 13, 2010

2010-07-13T11:14:00.000-07:00

Repost required again, thanks to a slip of the thumb! Thanks to SDGLN for posting my commentary on why we need to vote no on Prop 23 in the fall. 60% of Green venture dollars have come to CA, and this is in part because AB 32 creates a friendly policy environment for clean tech companies and jobs. Read more to see why Texas Big Oil is spending millions to try and kill our Global Warming Solutions Act, AB 32. Happy Pride, again.

"As San Diego Pride approaches, we deserve to both celebrate and take stock of all that we do for our own equality and for the whole globe.
As I pointed out in a piece on SDGLN, polls show that the LGBT community leads the nation in Green awareness, and our ethics embody the desire to save both nature and humanity from the rapidly growing dangers of a very real warming of the Earth’s climate.
We also lead in other, painful ways, as we are all too familiar with the danger from ballot attacks funded by out -of -state interests with lots of cash, as Prop. 8 demonstrated.
Even as BP’s errors and evasions are destroying self-reliant communities and creatures in the Gulf states, Texas oil companies Valero and Tesaro have the audacity to drill down into our community in an effort to win votes and kill an existing California Green law.
We have all seen this movie before. Scene 1: Mix a murky, toxic formula of fear, deception and millions of dollars. Scene 2: Get on the ballot in California, stop progress and maintain the status quo. Scene 3: Keep America addicted to oil, regardless of the consequences.
Proposition 23 will be on our November ballot, and it’s crucial that we stand together on this issue as an LGBT community. We must defend our innovative state and the planet, and reject Prop 23.
Why? Four years ago, with support from businesses, labor, environmental and health organizations, California passed a clean air law – AB 32 – that holds polluters accountable and requires them to reduce air pollution that threatens human health and contributes to global climate change.
This law, building on decades of state clean energy policies, has launched our state to the forefront of the clean technology industry – sparking innovation and clean energy businesses that are creating hundreds of thousands of new California jobs.
A clean California economy and our equality are at stake
The Texas oil companies’ initiative will allow polluters to avoid our state’s clean energy standards, kill competition and jobs from California's clean technology companies, and keep us addicted to dirty fossil fuels.
Many new clean tech jobs and inclusive companies are being created in San Diego’s clean tech hub right now because of the existing bipartisan clean energy law that Texas oil wants to light a match to.
The Texas carpetbaggers have some allies in California, such as billionaire Meg Whitman, Republican candidate for governor, who has said she would roll back clean air (and clean tech efforts) as a top priority if she is elected. However, a statewide coalition, StopDirtyEnergy, public interest groups Courage Campaign, California Bright Spot and others have entered the arena to defeat Prop 23.
Like all Californians, the San Diego LGBT community obviously needs new Green jobs, clean air, and a new clean energy standard. But we also need to send a loud, proud and unequivocal message:
Conservative Texas power trippers, don’t mess with our state or the LGBT community again!
For if Prop. 23 succeeds, external anti-gay forces will certainly be emboldened to try and parachute back into the Golden State and further diminish our rights. This summer Pride season, San Diego can start to show Texas oil what real power is all about by committing to reject this heinous proposition in the fall.
Kathleen Connell is a sustainability strategy consultant in San Diego and blogs about Green and the LGBT community at www.equalitygreen.blogspot.com. She is a member of the San Diego AB 32 Task Force, and a board member of The Sustainability Alliance of Southern California."

It's Green Over The Rainbow In Hillcrest

2010-07-02T00:23:00.000-07:00

Colored lights brighten Hillcrest night
LED devices shine up onto palm trees

BY KAITLIN SCHLUTER, CONTRIBUTING WRITER
THURSDAY, JULY 1, 2010 AT 9:41 P.M.

The skies of Hillcrest lit up with dazzling colors Thursday night — and it wasn’t even Independence Day.

More than 50 LED devices have been installed in the median along University Avenue between 10th Avenue and Normal Street. The Hillcrest Business Association funded the project, which took six months to complete and cost roughly $70,000. The devices, which shine upward onto palm trees, can be programmed to give off different hues for community events and holidays.

These include all the colors of the rainbow for the San Diego LGBT Pride week, red and yellow for San Diego City Fest, and green and purple for Mardi Gras.

“If the Chargers win a game ... we can do blue and gold,” said Benjamin Nicholls, executive director of the Hillcrest Business Association.

Each fixture contains flat little panels that generate light and color. The display is programmed by computer software to shine any palette. It’s green-friendly, too, giving off no heat and designed for longevity so bulbs don’t have to be changed often.

Dianne Sheridan, lighting specialist with Dianne Sheridan Designs, worked on the project, which contains a special clock that notifies the system to turn on once the sun disappears.

The hope is that the glow attracts patrons like moths.

“It’s a tangible reflection of the vibrant business community that’s already there,” said San Diego City Councilman Todd Gloria, whose district includes Hillcrest. He was invited to flip the switch Thursday.

The Hillcrest Business Association has posted a clip of the lights on YouTube.

Kaitlin Schluter: (619) 293-2043; kaitlin.schluter@uniontrib.com

- Posted using BlogPress mobile by Kat

Climate Basics: What Does The Number 350 Mean?

2010-06-15T13:23:00.000-07:00

Image: 350.org

SPF. MPG. HIV. Three letter identifiers we all know and understand. Here is a short term that can save the Planet: PPM. That stands for parts per million. And in this case, this the level of CO2 in the atmosphere that supports life as we know it. Guess what. We are over the limit. See image above, and to learn more, see the 350.org link. Who agrees and is a 350 messenger? A partial list below. Good company to be in. Join the 350 movement! The Planet you save may be your own.

A Climate Majority In America, Stanford Poll Says

2010-06-09T12:35:00.000-07:00

The global warming evidence and solutions are now overwhelmingly obvious to most Americans.
Repost from the Sierra Club and The New York Times, June 8, 2010

"The Climate Majority By JON A. KROSNICK Stanford, Calif. On Thursday, the Senate will vote on a resolution proposed by Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, that would scuttle the Environmental Protection Agency's plans to limit emissions of greenhouse gases by American businesses.. . But a closer look at... polls and a new survey by my Political Psychology Research Group show just the opposite: huge majorities of Americans still believe the earth has been gradually warming as the result of human activity and want the government to institute regulations to stop it. In our survey, which was financed by a grant to Stanford from the National Science Foundation, 1,000 randomly selected American adults were interviewed by phone between June 1 and Monday. When respondents were asked if they thought that the earth's temperature probably had been heating up over the last 100 years, 74 percent answered affirmatively. And 75 percent of respondents said that human behavior was substantially responsible for any warming that has occurred. For many issues, any such consensus about the existence of a problem quickly falls apart when the conversation turns to carrying out specific solutions that will be costly. But not so here. Fully 86 percent of our respondents said they wanted the federal government to limit the amount of air pollution that businesses emit, and 76 percent favored government limiting business's emissions of greenhouse gases in particular. Not a majority of 55 or 60 percent - but 76 percent. Large majorities opposed taxes on electricity (78 percent) and gasoline (72 percent) to reduce consumption. But 84 percent favored the federal government offering tax breaks to encourage utilities to make more electricity from water, wind and solar power. And huge majorities favored government requiring, or offering tax breaks to encourage, each of the following: manufacturing cars that use less gasoline (81 percent); manufacturing appliances that use less electricity (80 percent); and building homes and office buildings that require less energy to heat and cool (80 percent). Thus, there is plenty of agreement about what people do and do not want government to do. Our poll also indicated that some of the principal arguments against remedial efforts have been failing to take hold. Only 18 percent of respondents said they thought that policies to reduce global warming would increase unemployment and only 20 percent said they thought such initiatives would hurt the nation's economy. Furthermore, just 14 percent said the United States should not take action to combat global warming unless other major industrial countries like China and India do so as well. Our findings might seem implausible in light of recent polls that purport to show that Americans are increasingly skeptical about the very existence of climate change. But in fact, those polls did not produce conflicting evidence at all. Consider, for example, the most publicized question from a 2009 Pew Research Center poll: "From what you've read and heard, is there solid evidence that the average temperature on earth has been getting warmer over the past few decades, or not?" This question measured perceptions of scientific evidence that the respondent has read or heard about, not the respondents' personal opinions about whether the earth has been warming. Someone who has had no exposure to scientific evidence or who perceives the evidence to be equivocal may nonetheless be convinced that the earth has been heating up by, say, the early blossoming of plants in his garden. Or consider a widely publicized Gallup question: "Thinking about what is said in the news, in your view, is the seriousness of global warming generally exaggerated, generally correct or is it generally underestimated?" This question asked about respondents' perceptions of the news, not the respondents' perception of warming. A person who believes climate change has been happening might also feel that news media coverage of it has been exaggerated. Questions in other polls that sought to tap respondents' personal beliefs about the existence and causes of warming violated two of the cardinal rules of good survey question design: ask about only one thing at a time, and choose language that makes it easy for respondents to understand and answer each question. Imagine being asked this, from a poll by CNN: "Which of the following statements comes closest to your view of global warming: Global warming is a proven fact and is mostly caused by emissions from cars and industrial facilities like power plants and factories; global warming is a proven fact and is mostly caused by natural changes that have nothing to do with emissions from cars and industrial facilities; or, global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven." Notice that the question didn't even offer the opportunity for respondents to say they believe global warming is definitely not happening - not the sort of question that will provide the most valid measurements. When surveys other than ours have asked simple and direct questions, they have produced results similar to ours. For example, in November, an ABC News/Washington Post survey found that 72 percent of respondents said the earth has been heating up, and a December poll by Ipsos/McClatchy found this proportion to be 70 percent. Our surveys did reveal a small recent decline in the proportion of people who believe global warming has been happening, from 84 percent in 2007 to 80 percent in 2008 to 74 percent today. Statistical analysis of our data revealed that this decline is attributable to perceptions of recent weather changes by the minority of Americans who have been skeptical about climate scientists. In terms of average earth temperature, 2008 was the coldest year since 2000. Scientists say that such year-to-year fluctuations are uninformative, and people who trust scientists therefore ignore this information when forming opinions about global warming's existence. Citizens who do not trust climate scientists, however, base their conclusions on their personal observations of nature. These low-trust individuals were especially aware of the recent decline in average world temperatures; they were the ones in our survey whose doubts about global warming have increased since 2007. This explanation is especially significant, because it suggests that the small recent decline in the proportion of people who believe in global warming is likely to be temporary. If the earth's temperature begins to rise again, these individuals may reverse course and rejoin the large majority who still think warming is real. Growing public skepticism has, in recent months, been attributed to news reports about e-mail messages hacked from the computer system at the University of East Anglia in Britain (characterized as showing climate scientists colluding to silence unconvinced colleagues) and by the discoveries of alleged flaws in reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Our new survey discredited this claim in multiple ways. First, we found no decline in Americans' trust in environmental scientists: 71 percent of respondents said they trust these scientists a moderate amount, a lot or completely, a figure that was 68 percent in 2008 and 70 percent in 2009. Only 9 percent said they knew about the East Anglia e-mail messages and believed they indicated that climate scientists should not be trusted, and only 13 percent of respondents said so about the I.P.C.C. reports' alleged flaws. Interestingly, Americans are not alone in having their views portrayed inaccurately. A February BBC News survey asked Britons, "From what you know and have heard, do you think that the earth's climate is changing and global warming is taking place?" Seventy-five percent of respondents answered affirmatively, down a somewhat improbable eight percentage points from 83 percent in November. A BBC headline blared, "Climate Skepticism on the Rise," when it should have proclaimed that a huge majority of Britons still share common ground with one another and with Americans on this issue. GLOBAL warming has attracted what political scientists dub an "issue public": millions of Americans who are passionate about this subject and put pressure on government to follow their wishes. For over a decade, this group has been of typical issue-public size, about 15 percent of American adults. Although issue publics usually divide about equally on opposing sides - think of abortion or immigration - 88 percent of the climate change issue public in our survey believed that global warming has been happening; 88 percent attributed responsibility for it to human action; 92 percent wanted the federal government to limit the amount of greenhouse gases that businesses can emit. Put simply, the people whose votes are most powerfully shaped by this issue are sending a nearly unanimous signal to their elected representatives. All this makes global warming a singular issue in American politics. Even as we are told that Americans are about equally divided into red and blue, a huge majority shares a common vision of climate change. This creates a unique opportunity for elected representatives to satisfy a lot of voters. When senators vote on emissions limits on Thursday, there is one other number they might want to keep in mind: 72 percent of Americans think that most business leaders do not want the federal government to take steps to stop global warming. A vote to eliminate greenhouse gas regulation is likely to be perceived by the nation as a vote for industry, and against the will of the people. Jon A. Krosnick is a professor of communication, political science and psychology at Stanford."

Happy Mother Earth Day

2010-05-08T10:27:00.000-07:00

On Mothers Day, it certainly is appropriate to wish your birth mother well. She doesn't need a greeting card, and please don't send cut flowers. Do something great for Mother Earth. She made you, she keeps you alive. Happy Mother Earth Day.

Over at New Republic, Al Gore puts all insults to our mother planet in perspective, in the context of the Gulf spill.

The continuing undersea gusher of oil 50 miles off the shores of Louisiana is not the only source of dangerous uncontrolled pollution spewing into the environment. Worldwide, the amount of man-made CO2 being spilled every three seconds into the thin shell of atmosphere surrounding the planet equals the highest current estimate of the amount of oil spilling from the Macondo well every day. Indeed, the average American coal-fired power generating plant gushes more than three times as much global-warming pollution into the atmosphere each day—and there are over 1,400 of them.
Just as the oil companies told us that deep-water drilling was safe, they tell us that it’s perfectly all right to dump 90 million tons of CO2 into the air of the world every 24 hours.

Senator Nelson (D-FL) Declares Obama Drilling Proposal Dead On Arrival

2010-05-04T15:27:00.000-07:00

The BP oil spill reaction in the Congress grows.

Source: cqpolitics.com
"Florida Democrat Bill Nelson, who has been one of the most vocal opponents of new offshore drilling, has introduced legislation to do both. One bill would halt new exploratory wells such as the exploded Deepwater Horizon, until an investigation of the current disaster is complete. Another would dramatically raise the cap on an oil company’s liability for economic damages in a spill from $75 million to $10 billion.

Drilling opponents such as Nelson also hope to gain momentum for stronger measures, such as repealing President Obama’s recent proposal to allow oil and gas exploration off the southern Atlantic coast.

“The president’s proposal for offshore drilling of the coast of the southeast United States is D.O.A.,” Nelson said at a press conference Tuesday morning." More...

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=cqmidday-000003654799

Worst Case Scenario: Gulf Oil Gusher

2010-05-04T08:52:00.001-07:00

I know we are all hoping for the best case scenario in the Gulf oil gusher disaster. Here is a view on the worst case scenario from Mission ToHumanity.com and Business Insider.com

"Worst Case May Spill Into Economy

Unless the Gulf gusher is capped soon, the impact on the national economy could result in a double dip recession. Of particular enviro concern is the expected heavy hurricane season, which could stir up the massive muck and push it around the region. The concern is that the Gulf may be dead for a decade or more, and clean up can take that long, or longer. I hope the housing being prepared to cap the seabed leak works, for all of our sake.

http://www.businessinsider.com/david-kotok-125-billion-is-just-the-start-of-the-oil-cleanup-costs-and-a-double-dip-is-now-way-more-likely-2010-5"

- Posted using BlogPress mobile by Kathleen

Inclusive, Safe Green Economy Improves Jobs for California

2010-04-27T11:21:00.000-07:00

Eureka, I have found something interesting from the State of California. This morning I got an email from the California Labor Department, as follows:

You've been invited to be a part of Green Economy Ideas. We'd like to ask you to pay a visit to submit and vote on ideas. Help us determine what is most important to you and the larger community.
To protect your email address we require that you confirm your email address by clicking the link below:

http://ca.green.ideascale.com/a/pvrfy/438090-gykdjuexnf-8262

Thank You
Green Economy Ideas
For more information please email : evan.mcginnis@labor.ca.gov

The California Labor Department is soliciting ideas online about content around a Green Economy and Green Jobs. Kudos to the Labor Department for entering the open government waters! Here is my submission, below. Hit the header to go there and submit your idea and vote. It looks that there is actually a link to track their progress. Let's see how they do.

Inclusive, Safe Green Economy Improves Jobs for Californians

Vote

The new CA green economy has an opportunity to:
-Explicitly welcome all workers, regardless of sex, race, gender,
disability, age, sexual orientation,
et al, and other criteria, not really honored in the carbon based economy.

In addition, other best practices- like buying American, and reducing global outsourcing, should get priority for government support in the Green jobs arena.

Thirdly, CA government must do more to
reach out to displaced white collar workers, who number in the millions.

These and other content areas are not
yet adequately addressed on the web, such that they are searchable. This can be dealt with by creating:
•A one-stop Green jobs web portal, aggregating
all truly Green companies, (with links to
external verification of such Green claims), would assist job hunters in finding positions as they become available.

On the policy side, CA must focus utilization of truly safe clean tech technologies that
are already available-such as solar. This content should be prioritized for both job creation and environmental protection. Killer technologies- like nuclear or off-shore drilling should not be highlighted or green washed in California as a Green job. These jobs are dangerous for workers, and the climate, as the recent Gulf oil spill disaster proves once again.

Green is not just another pretty color in the rainbow flag (cross post from SDGLN)

2010-04-21T12:57:00.000-07:00

Green is not just another pretty color in the rainbow flag

Kathleen Connell - Special to SDGLN | Wed, 04/21/2010 - 10:16am

ENLARGE

On the eve of the 40th anniversary of Earth Day, it is worth observing that a recent survey demonstrates that LGBT adults lead the nation in awareness of, and concern over, global warming.
The LGBT sector is leading America in “green” consciousness, and has already embraced ideas that green organizers hope the rest of the nation will endorse and act on.
An Echelon Magazine 2009 online survey reports that “two-thirds (66%) of lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender adults, say that it is important to support environmental causes, compared with 56% of non-LGBT adults. Three-quarters (75%) of LGBT adults (compared with 53% of heterosexuals) believe global warming is happening right now, and by more than two-to-one proportions, 39% of LGBT adults say they have seen or read Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ while only 20% of heterosexuals say they have seen or read it.”
Apparently our LGBT community also cares about the environment and the future of next generation, whether we have children or not.
“Most significant,” said Bob Witeck of Echelon, “is the measure of global environmental stewardship. Although LGBT households are not parenting as frequently as our non-gay counterparts, 51% say they are concerned about the planet we are leaving behind for future generations – compared with 42% of heterosexual adults. This signals a very high sense of community and cooperation that many LGBT citizens know first-hand.”
What does it mean to say we understand global warming? It means that we understand that human civilization, our planetary ecosystem, and our companion species are all in great peril, as we reach, or may be now surpassing, carbon-induced climate tipping points and the warming of the earth’s land, sea and sky.
Two moral issues: equality and global warming
Dr. Jim Hansen, a NASA climate expert (and the first scientist to warn Congress about global warming 20 years ago at a hearing held by then-Sen. Al Gore), recently declared in The Huffington Post: "The predominant moral issue of the 21st century, almost surely, will be climate change, comparable to Nazism faced by Churchill in the 20th century and slavery faced by Lincoln in the 19th century. Our fossil fuel addiction, if unabated, threatens our children and grandchildren, and most species on the planet."
Hansen is right about the moral implication of continued dependence on carbon energy to fuel our lives and economy. There is also another moral struggle going on by which this generation will be judged. That is the continuing dehumanization, discrimination, hate and violence directed at LGBT people.
Our own hampered civil and personal lives mirrors a disregard for our home planet, which is in crisis from a century of abuse. The mentality that allows desecration of the ecosystem is the same mindset that continues to allow the second-class citizenship of LGBT people everywhere. Ironically, we who are wronged by today’s social norms are the very folks standing on the moral high ground when it comes to the planet and the future of society.
Rebuilding the LGBT and Green alliance
Harvey Milk was a master strategist in terms of alliance building, and 40 years ago, included the environmental movement in the big tent of the fight for LGBT equality.
"The plaque” covering Milk's ashes reads, in part: “[Harvey Milk's] camera store and campaign headquarters at 575 Castro Street and his apartment upstairs were centers of community activism for a wide range of human rights, environmental, labor and neighborhood issues.”
Alliances are good politics in general, as Milk and others have shown in the pursuit of full LGBT equality. Many Greens have also moved beyond eco-purism to embrace alliances with labor, business and other sectors, so the time is right to join forces on issues that matter to both groups.
The time to act is now, as neither Equality nor Greening our society can wait.
It is also appropriate that Greens, clean energy entrepreneurs and a host of other eco-mavens openly welcome the LGBT community to the clean tech revolution and support our equality as well. We are already present at the solar job forums, adopting energy efficiency, leading Green organizations.
We can be seen reliably voting as a block for Green candidates like Sen. Barbara Boxer, who is a leader of climate legislation in the U.S. Senate and is running for re-election in California.
We also need to create our own Green groups within our community.
Ultimately we will need to be at the ballot box for one another, whether the issue is No on Proposition 16, an anti-energy choice bill on the ballot this fall, or a future vote to overturn the gay marriage ban in California.
After all, a world worth living must be both equal and green.
Kathleen Connell, M.A., is from San Francisco. She is a sustainability consultant in San Diego, with a career background at NASA. She is a founding member and current board member of The Sustainability Alliance of Southern California. She blogs about LGBT Equality and Green issues at www.EqualityGreen.blogspot.com

Events: Green Chamber of Commerce of San Diego County: April 13th

2010-04-07T14:36:00.000-07:00

I am glad to see this group take root in San Diego. The next meeting/networker location and registration info is here.
5;30PM at the Belly Up Tavern in Solana Beach.
And at $10 in advance, $12 at the door the price is right. Looks fun, too!

Exxon: Bottom of the Equality and Green Barrel

2010-02-19T10:57:00.000-08:00

Image Credit: www,hrc.org

One common issue that the Green movement and LGBT folks have in common is outright discrimination and disregard by the oil giant ExxonMobile.

I am assured by a friend with HRC that Exxon is still earning a 0 rating in thier ranking of employers. The Human Rights Campaign, which evaluates employers for LGBT-friendly workplace practices and policies says about ExxonMobile:

"ExxonMobil is the only U.S. employer that has ever rescinded both a non-discrimination policy covering sexual orientation and domestic partner benefits, and is the only Fortune 10 company that does not have a non-discrimination policy covering sexual orientation.
Mobil Corp. had written non-discrimination protections based on sexual orientation that were revoked upon its merger with Exxon Corp in 1999. Mobil also provided domestic partner health benefits to its employees; enrollment in partner benefits ended after the merger with Exxon in 1999."

That assessment has me hitting the brakes when it's time to refuel. HRC also points out that BP, Chevron, Shell and ConocoPhillips all prohibit discrimination and offer Domestic Partnership benefits, and BP, Chevron and Shell also prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity. So long Exxon, I am driving across the street to BP, Chevron or Shell, whenever possible.

Eco folk have also long had big issues with resistant Exxon as well, even as many other Fortune 500 companies have moved to support renewable energy and a clean tech economy. Green groups like the Environmental Defense Fund are increasingly willing to work with corporate climate change agents.

ExxonMobile, to the contrary, has fought moving off the carbon economy with vigor. In particular, according to Greenpeace, Exxon continues to fund-and has spent over $22 million-supporting so-called "climate skeptics" through a complex of intermediary organizations, think tanks, and politicians. Greenpeace maintains an active watch on this global warming denial via the"Exxon Secrets" project. Their report is here. Says Greenpeace:

"ExxonSecrets is a Greenpeace research project highlighting the more than a decade-long campaign by Exxon-funded front groups - and the scientists they work with - to deny the urgency of the scientific consensus on global warming and delay action to fix the problem. For more information see our FAQ.
The database compiles Exxon Foundation and corporate funding to a series of institutions who have worked to undermine solutions to global warming and climate change. It details the working relationships of individuals associated with these organizations and their global warming quotes and deeds."

Discrimination against far flung small towns with little clout is in the ExxonMobile portfolio of shame as well. Some folks remember the Exxon Valdez oil disaster near Prince William Sound, Alaska, but most of us have forgotten it or would like to. It seems this is by design, as Exxon fought reparations to the town and the environment. A documentary tells that chilling story. Check out the BBC film Oil Spill: The Exxon Valdez Disaster for a refresher course on just how calculating, irresponsible, and disdainful the Exxon corporation has been over the years.

As we convert to a clean tech economy, most of us still need oil and gasoline to fuel even the coolest of hybrids. If we LGBT consumers take our business to Greener, non-discriminating companies in our daily purchases, the clicking shut of the pink purse will be heard in boardrooms and on Wall Street. Maybe even insular Exxon might give it's priorities a second look.

Pump Your Gym: Is It Green?

2010-02-05T14:48:00.000-08:00

You want better health in 2010, and a core of steel, and your gym wants your membership dues. Maybe you are switching gyms in 2010 to avoid running into the So-Last-Year BF or GF of 2009. So while switching gyms, or staying with your favorite, where everybody loves you, it is now a good idea to check in with staff and find out how Green they are. How committed is your gym to not only your health, but to the health of the planet? Here are some questions to ask, below. Gyms fight hard to retain your business, or should, so demonstrating an interest in Green is actually letting the gym how to serve you better. In addition, of course, to adding more equipment and classes. A well run Green gym will save the owners money, too, by going paperless and paying attention to energy efficiency retrofit and popping some subsidized solar panels on the roof. They might even pass the savings on to you. It never hurts to ask, and that show real strength. The questions:
(Image credit: musclesurf.com)

Source: Mother Nature News

1. Do you recycle?

Bins for water bottles, newspapers, magazines, cans and other recyclable materials are prominently placed in VIDA Fitness’ three clubs in Washington. “Every place that we have a trash can, we have a recycle bin,” says Nathan Zapf, assistant general manager.

Also consider how much paper the gym wastes on paperwork, or if it is making an effort to be paperless.

The Green Microgym chose not to sell plastic water bottles, instead selling stainless steel reusable bottles. The IHRSA suggests that clubs give new members a reusable water bottle to encourage them to use tap water.

Gyms also might have programs in place to donate items such as tennis balls, equipment and towels to schools, shelters and charitable organizations.

2. How do you control your energy usage?

A gym can make several decisions related to its lighting, heating, air conditioning and energy-using amenities.

“If you go in during any slow time, are all the lights still on, are all the TVs still on? That will tell you that they don’t care,” Boesel says. “We give a little more responsibility and trust to our members to turn the TVs on and off. They’re not on when no one is watching.”

The IHRSA suggests adding motion detectors to control the lights.

Boesel’s gym focuses on eliminating power usage – and even generating electricity – with its equipment. Its Team Dynamo stationary bikes can collectively generate up to 350 watts continuously, helping to power the gym, and its Eco-Powr treadmills by SportsArt Fitness use 30 percent less electricity than others.

Some gyms are replacing incandescent lights with compact fluorescent lights. Zapf says VIDA Fitness found CFL bulbs that matched the quality of light produced by the traditional incandescent bulbs, which generate more heat and use more electricity. The club uses a plastic disk, called a fluorescent fixer, that diffuses the light so the glare is not as harsh.

3. Are your cleaning supplies environmentally friendly?

That can include everything from what’s used on the floors and sweaty mats to materials used to wipe down the machines.

“Really you could just look around at the place and get an idea about what their sort of philosophy is on how wasteful they are,” Boesel says. “If they have cloth towels to wipe things down as opposed to those wipes that are one use and they go in the garbage.”

VIDA Fitness’ staff uses reusable microfiber cloths to clean equipment two to three times a day (the wipes are still offered to members). The club also uses bottles with a low spray dispenser, reducing its chemical usage by a third, Zapf says.

The IHRSA recommends that gyms replace products used for cleaning or personal care with those made of nontoxic, plant-based compounds. The facilities can use paints and coatings with the Green Seal, carpets and rugs with the Green Label certification and formaldehyde-free composite wood materials.

4. Are you paying attention to the outdoors?

Gyms can trade maintaining the surroundings with pesticides for products such as organic, phosphorus-free fertilizer.

Pools also can be switched from being filtered with chlorine to saline, like VIDA Fitness has done. Three benefits for members, according to the IHRSA, include: no need for goggles, less chance of their swimsuits fading and their skin will be less dry.

5. Are the extras eco-friendly?

Toilet paper, soap, towels -- all those items could be composed of recycled, nontoxic and/or organic items, depending on how much the gym wants to spend. Some also are using eco-friendly flooring, Boesel says, made of materials such as cork and recycled rubber.

At some gyms, automatic faucets and hand dryers have been installed along with dispensers that ration the soap and paper towels. Low-flow faucets, showerheads and toilets also save water.

The IHRSA also recommends that fitness centers offer a discount to members who use their own cups at the clubs’ café or juice bar and reward potential customers who show proof of membership in an eco-friendly group by waiving the initiation fee like Eco Fit in Sao Paulo, Brazil, does.

Yale Poll: Thumbs Up On Cash Back To Americans for Reducing Carbon

2010-02-04T11:32:00.000-08:00

Image Credit: http://smyrc.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/gay-money.jpg
Harvey on a Greenback. He would look great on a dollar...

Treehugger reports today on the latest Yale poll, wherein Americans actually support Green (and some drill, baby, drlll). This contradicts last weeks poll, but we are fickle. But here is the nugget. Folks said that if each house(hold) was given $180 cash per year from Cap And Trade, they would largely support it. Now, we all know LGBT are having a hard enough time getting counted in the census, but let us assume we know what a household is. Do you support getting cash back for reducing emissions? I bring this up, because I do, and I want to see automatic Green-related income go to Americans, not just the big companies and traders. Any hey! If we can't wed, well then, individuals, not "households" should get their Green back.

" Nearly Two-Thirds Haven't Even Heard of Cap-and-Trade
"When it came to cap-and-trade, some 60% of people had heard "nothing at all" about legislation currently proposed in Congress. 12% had heard "a lot". When the concept was explained to them, 58% supported the policy--though when household energy cost increases crossed the $15/month barrier, support dropped to 40%. That said, if each house was given a dividend of $180/year from the program to offset higher energy costs, two-thirds of people supported the program."

Some more specific numbers:
85% supported funding more research on renewable energy.
82% favored tax rebates for people buying fuel-efficient cars or solar panels.
72% wanted to establish programs teaching Americans how to save energy.
71% supported regulating CO2 as a pollutant.
70% wanted schools to teach kids about the causes, consequences and potential solutions to global warming. 60% thought there ought to be courses established to teach all Americans about global warming.
61% supported the US signing an international treaty requiring the nation to cut CO2 emissions by 90% by 2050."

Oscar Goes Gaga For Green

2010-02-03T17:03:00.000-08:00

It's time for the Oscar perp walk, and in the Best Picture and Documentary category, it's all about show me the Green, in more ways than one.
Equality Green recommends bright green cumberbunds for your view party, or if on a budget, sipping on a 2 for 1 retro-but-so-chic Grasshopper beverage. Recycle the swizzle sticks, please. Or, bring your Avatar along as a cheap eco-date. They generally do not leave a carbon footprint.
Film and DVD get the Green message out to millions, if not billions, so we commend the Academy for nominating these films.
And the Oscar goes to...?

Source: Treehugger.com
Yesterday the Academy Awards announced the nominees for the big Hollywood Oscar extravaganza on March 7. Of course, Avatar is among the ten candidates in the Best Motion Picture of the Year category, tying with the Iraqi drama, The Hurt Locker, for highest number of nominations. As a frontrunner, the record-breaking blockbuster of all-time is getting out its "controversial" environmental message, and the sci-fi epic stands a good chance of taking the prize--not just the box office top spot (for the 7 week in a row, and counting). In the Best Documentary Feature listing there are more worthy eco-contenders, including Food, Inc. and The Cove, which recently took the Critics Choice award. Here are the finalists:

• "The Cove" (Roadside Attractions), An Oceanic Preservation Society Production, Jim Clark and Fisher Stevens, Producers. An expose of the brutal dolphin slaughter in Taiji, Japan, through a covert mission, using hidden cameras in barred areas. Also reveals toxic levels of mercury in mislabeled dolphin meat.

• "Food, Inc." (Magnolia Pictures), A Robert Kenner Films Production, Robert Kenner and Elise Pearlstein. An expose of the agri-industrial food chain and the dangers of hidden ingredients and the corporate practices...

...of the 15 semi-finalists, only one other eco-film didn't make the cut, "Garbage Dreams," Mai Iskander, director (Iskander Films, Inc.), a deep look at the lives of Egyptian trash collectors.
The Cove director Louie Psihoyos, who also won the Directors Guild of America award for Best Doc, spoke in the showbiz trade The Wrap about the meaning of winning:

It's frightful how important it is [winning the Oscar]. It's the second biggest TV audience in the world, I think. And that'll also validate it in the eyes of the Japanese people. They'll say, "Oh my god, there's that movie again." You know, they say when you're done with a film you're only about halfway there. I feel like we're about a quarter of the way there. And getting nominated would be huge. Last year, about 300,000 people saw the film. By the end of this year, with DVD and television, over 300 million people will see the film. And the Oscars can only help that.

Senate Wants Clean Energy, Solar in Jobs Bill

2010-01-25T13:26:00.000-08:00

Senate Wants Clean Energy, Solar in Jobs Bill

Neither Greens Nor Gays Need Apply

2010-01-17T09:17:00.000-08:00

Rolling Stone published a list of climate change deniers, and of course Senator James Inhofe R-OK)
is among them. He practices open discrimination, by refusing to hire LGBT in his office. A DOMA hugger, he also claims
to have no homosexuals in his family tree.
Maybe God, Gays and Guns needs to meet Green, Gays and ? at the OK policy corral. If you can help me come up with the third G, post it here.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone

ENDLESS ENDA Delays Can Hamper New Green Economy

2009-12-04T12:17:00.000-08:00

ENDA is delayed, again in Congress, reports Bilerico.com

Here is a moment where Congressional foot dragging on LGBT employment equality conflicts directly with economic recovery. Echelon.com reported that LGBT overwhelming get that we need a Green economy, moving that agenda right along for the betterment of society.
However, if LGBT are themselves discriminated against in employment and business- be it in a Green or any other color job- its going to be harder to move the New Energy sector forward, just as Out and not so Out LGBT led in the Internet era. In other words, innovation and the economy looses when tremendously creative LGBT are left behind at work.

Poll: 75% of LGBT Support Green... Care The Most About Future Generations

2009-11-30T12:20:00.000-08:00

Image: Green is not just another pretty color in the rainbow flag, according to poll.

Recent research demonstrates that LGBT adults are overwhelmingly engaged, informed and knowledgable about Green and global warming.I think the recent poll that unearthed this finding deserves republishing. In sum, the LGBT sector is far and away leading America in Green, and is already where Green organizers want to go, in terms of American positions on climate change, and actually caring about future generations.
Source: Echelon.com

New York, N.Y. and Washington, DC – October 26, 2009 – Two-thirds (66%) of lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender adults, asked in a new national survey conducted online, say that it is important to support environmental causes, compared with 56% of non-LGBT adults. Three-quarters (75%) of LGBT adults (compared with 53% of heterosexuals) believe global warming is happening right now, and by more than two to one proportions, 39% of LGBT adults say they have seen or read Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” while only 20% of heterosexuals say they have seen or read it.

Further, and this is counter to every biased myth out there, the poll's sponsor points out:

“Most significant,” Witeck(Bob Witeck, CEO of Witeck-Combs Communications-Editor) added, “is the measure of global environmental stewardship. Although LGBT households are not parenting as frequently as our non-gay counterparts, 51% say they are concerned about the planet we are leaving behind for future generations – compared with 42% of heterosexual adults. This signals a very high sense of community and cooperation that many LGBT citizens know first-hand.”

------------------------30-----------------------

Equality Green: News, Views and Reviews for the LGBT Community

2009-11-29T13:03:00.000-08:00

Welcome to Equality Green!

As far as I know, this is one of the first blogs on Green for the LGBT community. As a Green expert, I realized that LGBT people are just as vulnerable to global warming and climate change as everyone else, but not really represented in the movement to Green the planet and the economy. When I am out and about in the sustainability community, I see a lot of LGBT folks at events, jobs conferences and in organizations, but no place is made for us to meet, support each other and get organized. Equality Green is your new online Green LGBT destination, and I will strive to provide smart, fun LGBT-focused posts about what’s happening in the emerging Green sector.

Why bother? Equality is why. Unity in the face of the enormous, unprecedented challenge of global warming. In my early 20’s, I lived in San Francisco and was a participant in Harvey Milk’s emerging Castro community. Harvey insisted, and demonstrated, that coalition building is on the critical path to our full equality. We need to link to the Green revolution that is taking root, and play leadership roles as well.

As we fight for our basic equality and equal protection, we also need protection from the severity of climate change. We must add to our incomes these days, and access the funding and subsidies that are available for solar and energy efficiency retrofits. This way we can save thousands on our energy bills, and also reduce our carbon footprint, in order to save the planet.

Together, we can grow an online Green community, and represent in the new LGBT Green society and economy that is being born! Thanks for recommending Equality Green to your friends on Facebook and Twitter, too! More to do as I build out this site and proliferate it. Join us!

--------------------30-----------------------