sustainability

Thu Sep 21, 2006 5:54am ET
By Michael Kahn

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - California sued six of the world's largest automakers over global warming on Wednesday, charging that greenhouse gases from their vehicles have caused billions of dollars in damages.

The lawsuit is the first of its kind to seek to hold manufacturers liable for the damages caused by their vehicles' emissions, state Attorney General Bill Lockyer said.

It comes less than a month after California lawmakers adopted the nation's first global warming law mandating a cut in greenhouse gas emissions.

California has also targeted the auto industry with first-in-the-nation rules adopted in 2004 requiring carmakers to force cuts in tailpipe emissions from cars and trucks.

Automakers, however, have so far blocked those rules with their own legal action -- prompting one analyst to say California's lawsuit represents a way for California to pressure car manufacturers to accept the rules.

"That's the objective," said David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research, a nonprofit organization that provides public research and forecasts about the industry. "They want to get the automakers basically to bow down and pay homage to the (emissions) law."

The complaint, which an auto industry trade group called a "nuisance" suit, names General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co., Toyota Motor Corp., the U.S. arm of Germany's DaimlerChrysler AG and the North American units of Japan's Honda Motor Co. and Nissan Motor Co. Ltd..

Lockyer told Reuters he would seek "tens or hundreds of millions of dollars" from the automakers in the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Northern California.

Environmental groups hailed the lawsuit, saying it represented another weapon for the state as it seeks to curb greenhouse gas emissions and spur the auto industry to build vehicles that pollute less.

"(California) just passed a new law to cut global warming emissions by 25 percent and that's a good start and this lawsuit is a good next step," said Dan Becker, director of the Sierra Club's Global Warming Program.

Ford deferred comment to the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which said the lawsuit was similar to one a New York court dismissed that is now on appeal.

"Automakers will need time to review this legal complaint, however, a similar nuisance suit that was brought by attorneys- general against utilities was dismissed by a federal court in New York," the industry group said in a statement.

Toyota declined to comment as the company evaluates the lawsuit, while Honda said in a statement it was committed to developing environmentally responsible technology.

The other automakers had no immediate comment.

But Sean Hecht, executive director of the Environmental Law Center at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the lawsuit has a "reasonable" chance of succeeding.

He also noted the judge in the New York lawsuit cited rarely-used legal doctrine in ruling that the question at issue was political rather than legal and should therefore be addressed by the legislature and not the court.

"I was surprised that the court in that case did that," he said. "I think it is a straight forward legal question. My impression is this is a very legitimate case to bring."

The lawsuit seeks monetary damages for past and ongoing contributions to global warming and asks that the companies be held liable for future monetary damages to California.

It said California is spending millions to deal with reduced snow pack, beach erosion, ozone pollution and the impact on endangered animals and fish.

"The injuries have caused the people to suffer billions of dollars in damages, including millions of dollars of funds expended to determine the extent, location and nature of future harm and to prepare for and mitigate those harms, and billions of dollars of current harm to the value of flood control infrastructure and natural resources," it said.

The Center for Automotive Research's Cole said it would be tough for the industry to immediately meet demands from some critics and predicted other states would quickly follow suit should California succeed with the legal action.

Adoption of diesel engine emissions technology or gasoline- electric hybrids comes at great cost and improving gas mileage also likely means smaller lighter vehicles, trade-offs that are not attractive to consumers, he added.

"These are not free technologies, they are very expensive," Cole said. "Most people are price sensitive."

In the complaint, Lockyer charges that vehicle emissions have contributed significantly to global warming and have harmed the resources, infrastructure and environmental health of the most populous state in the United States.

Lockyer -- a Democratic candidate for state treasurer in the November election -- said the lawsuit states that under federal and state common law the automakers have created a public nuisance by producing "millions of vehicles that collectively emit massive quantities of carbon dioxide."

Carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gases have been linked to global warming.

Posted by EB at 01:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Press Release from Enviroment Maryland

Global Warming is impacting temperatures

September 14, 2006—This year’s unprecedented heat wave is part of a broader trend of rising temperatures in Maryland, according to a new report released today by Environment Maryland. 

In the continental United States, the first seven months of 2006 were the warmest January-July of any year on record, according to the National Climatic Data Center. In Maryland, the average temperature was 2.8° F above the 20th century average, making it the eighth warmest January-July on record. The average temperature since 2000 in Baltimore is up 0.9° F compared with the previous three decades (1971-2000).

“Because of our increasing levels of global warming pollution, temperatures will almost certainly continue to rise,” said Environment Maryland State Director Brad Heavner. “We must quickly and significantly reduce global warming pollution to keep temperatures below catastrophic levels.”

To examine how these recent temperature patterns compare with temperatures over the last 30 years, Environment Maryland researchers analyzed temperature data from 255 major weather stations in all 50 states and Washington, DC for the years 2000-2005 and the first six months of 2006. This recent data was compared to “normal” temperatures for the three decades spanning 1971-2000. Key findings include:

• Nationally, between 2000 and 2005, the average temperature was above normal at 95% of the locations, indicating widespread warming. In addition, nights are getting warmer; the average minimum (nighttime low) temperature was above normal at 92% of the locations examined.

• In Baltimore, between 2000 and 2005, the average minimum (nighttime low) temperature was 1.2° F above normal. 

“Two or three degrees may not seem like much, but just like in people, a small, relatively rapid temperature rise can have serious consequences,” continued Heavner.  

Numerous studies have shown that sea levels are already on the rise, ice and snow cover are declining, and hurricanes are becoming more powerful. In Maryland, global warming will have severe impacts.
〈         Rising sea levels, combined with sinking land, have swallowed 13 islands in the Chesapeake Bay and consume 260 acres of land in Maryland each year.
〈         Scientists predict precipitation will increase by 20 percent this century, largely from major storm activity.
〈         Heat waves will be more frequent and severe, which will increase deaths and illnesses from extreme heat.
〈         Droughts will be more frequent and extreme, as warmer temperatures evaporate moisture in the soil more quickly.

To avoid the worst consequences of global warming, the U.S. must stabilize global warming emissions within the next decade, begin reducing them soon thereafter, and cut emissions by 80% by the middle of this century. 

“The good news is that we already have the tools to substantially reduce global warming pollution. We just have to put the solutions to work,” said Heavner.

In August, Environment Maryland released a report showing how the U.S. could cut global warming pollution by nearly 20% by 2020 by making our homes, cars, and businesses more efficient, switching to renewable energy sources, and giving Americans more alternatives to driving, paired with strong, mandatory limits on global warming emissions. 

“These are win-win solutions because they also will improve America’s long-term economy and energy security by reducing U.S. dependence on oil and other fossil fuels,” stated Heavner.

This summer Rep. Henry Waxman of California introduced legislation, called the Safe Climate Act (H.R. 5642), to harness clean energy solutions and reduce U.S. global warming emissions by 15% by 2020 and by 80% by 2050. Sen. Jim Jeffords introduced a similar measure in the Senate.

Among the Maryland congressional delegation, Sen. Sarbanes is a co-sponsor of the Senate bill and Reps. Cardin, Cummings, Van Hollen and Wynn are co-sponsors of the House bill. Environment Maryland is calling on Sen. Mikulski and Reps. Bartlett, Gilchrest, Hoyer, and Ruppersburger to join their colleagues in co-sponsoring this legislation.

Posted by EB at 08:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Voice features a Q & A column called Earth Talk, from E/The Environmental Magazine. Here's a recent submission.

There are many examples of climate change’s real and present impact. For one, the 20 hottest years since record keeping began in the 1880s have all occurred since 1983, and until this year 2005 was the hottest year ever. Now, according to a new U.S. climate report, 2006 is well on its way to taking the top spot.

If you like New England’s maple syrup, you’ll be dismayed to know that producers report seeing global warming’s effect on their seasonal harvesting cycles. Farmers are tapping their trees a month earlier than their ancestors did, and some fear that global warming will eventually reduce the trees’ ability to produce high-quality sap. “I think the sugar maple industry is on its way out,” says University of New Hampshire professor Barrett Rock, who led research on regional risks related to climate change.

Some ski resorts in the Pacific Northwest blame global warming for the warm weather that shut down the 2004-2005 season before it even began. University of Washington professor of atmospheric sciences Cliff Mass reports that less snow has been falling in Washington State for the last 20 years. “Global warming is occurring,” he concludes. Also in trouble due to declining snow are New England and Midwestern resorts.

The loss of sandy beaches due to climate-aggravated sea level rises is also troubling, and the problem is accelerating. The National Science Foundation’s Metro East Coast report says that beach erosion will likely double by the 2020s, increase from three- to six-fold by the 2050s and by as much as 10-fold by the 2080s. Already, sand loss has led to large beach replenishment efforts by the Army Corps of Engineers.

And keep plenty of calamine lotion on hand. Researchers at Duke University found that some vines--including poison ivy--may thrive exponentially in a warmer climate. Experiments showed that poison ivy growing in a carbon dioxide-rich environment grew about three times larger than normal and produced significantly more urushiol, the allergenic substance that causes rashes.

Another indicator of increased warming is the retreat of glaciers across western North America. This troubling phenomenon is especially noticeable in the Waterton-Glacier park complex on the U.S.-Canada border. Several major glaciers there have shrunk by half or more in recent decades. On the U.S. side of the border, the number of glaciers in Glacier National Park has dropped from 150 in 1850 to 35 today.

Wildlife is also feeling the heat. A 2004 study by the Wildlife Society, a 9,000-member group of wildlife professionals, found that global warming is affecting many North American species and could cause major shifts in ecosystems. The group concluded that caribou, polar bears, migratory songbirds and other species have already responded to climate change by shifting habitat, altering their breeding patterns or changing their migration routes.

Finally, stronger storms like Hurricane Katrina in recent years may be partially explained by global warming. Researchers have found that both the intensity and number of category 4 and 5 storms have greatly increased in the past 35 years, and have linked that phenomenon to warming ocean temperatures.

CONTACT: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, www.ipcc.ch.

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.

Posted by EB at 02:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Honoring Katrina's Legacy–

The Ravaging Tide: Strange Weather, Future Katrinas, and the Coming Death of America's Coastal Cities by Mike Tidwell
Review by Liesl Groberg

I’ve worked at the Takoma Voice and Silver Spring Voice for about a year and a half now. In that time, I’ve seen Julie Wiatt’s photo of a cat sleeping on Mike Tidwell’s corn-burning stove so many times I can describe the variations in the animal’s yellow tabby fur right down to the tip of her tail. Tidwell’s carbon-neutral lifestyle is regularly on display at his Takoma Park home, where he instructively holds a green open house several times a year.

To those of us who have yet to make his acquaintance, Tidwell, author, journalist and founder of the local Chesapeake Climate Action Network, appears to be a quintessential Takoman: well educated and perhaps a little righteous in his indignation against our oil-addicted establishment, fighting the good fight through energy conservation and innovations.

Last week I finished Tidwell’s latest book The Ravaging Tide: Strange Weather, Future Katrinas and the Coming Death of America’s Coastal Cities (Free Press), and got a healthy dose of his perspective. I’m now convinced that Americans are setting the stage for more disasters by not reigning in our insatiable taste for electricity and petroleum. This book is a must-read for anyone who considers him or herself a citizen of the world.
In a nutshell, Tidwell blames Hurricane Katrina’s disastrous but predictable impact on the effects of global warming, which has been largely ignored by our current, oil-loving government. Denial and inaction has culminated in horror and irreparable losses. But there’s more to the story.

Tidwell explains his thesis with a combination of anecdotes and statistical data. His sources vary from Cajun shrimpers to internationally recognized climate scientists to his very own eyes. He focuses primarily on two aspects of climate change and how they set the stage for Katrina’s (and subsequently Hurricane Rita’s) threat.
First, near the mouth of the lower Mississippi River, where centuries-old levees have denied the River its natural ability to flood and replace land that washes away during heavy rains, the coastal “boot” of Louisiana has been gradually sinking, just as the state’s barrier islands have been disappearing. Previously forested areas, which would have provided at least some cushion from the storm traveling inward toward the city, were already covered in water, the trees long dead and bare of their canopy. He shows the significance of coastal deforestation with a comparison to the 2004 South Asian tsunami:

Researchers found that shorelines lined with mangrove forests suffered significantly less damage than areas where tidal wave met land denuded by human activity. This scientific analysis…suggests that just 30 trees per 120 square yards in a 100-yard-wide belt could diminish the maximum tsunami impact by more than 90 percent.

(The Ravaging Tide, p. 25)

While many Americans may have known, even before the spotlight of Katrina, that much of New Orleans was below sea level, most of us probably didn’t understand that that wasn’t always the case. The land loss and vulnerable state of New Orleans in particular was a result of the levee system.
Second, globally, the warming trend, caused by damage to the ozone layer that blankets the planet, is responsible for a drastic melting near the poles. Simply put, thanks to the resulting meltwater, our oceans are overflowing the world over, encroaching dangerously wherever land meets water.

To understand even a little of what the scientific community knows about global warming is to understand that our current behavior ties us to a track with a speeding train hurtling toward us. I believe, and I think you would, too, after reviewing the evidence Tidwell brings together, that Americans are at a fork in the road.

Rapid deterioration of coastal wetlands combined with more extreme weather systems (a trend also attributed to global warming, according to Tidwell) means any community within a hundred miles of the shore is at risk of a similarly ruinous fate. He cites frightening, wake-up-call statistics in passage after passage like the following:

Among the many disturbing impacts projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is this one: …by 2100 …every coastline in the world, …may soon find its relationship to the sea altered a full three feet in favor of the ocean, just like New Orleans. …The glad-it’s-not-me feeling you had toward post-Katrina should be fading by now. If you live anywhere from lower Manhattan to inner city Baltimore to the southern suburbs of Houston you now know what it’s like to be a resident of New Orleans prior to August 29, 2005.

(The Ravaging Tide, p. 66)

Tidwell identifies himself as an optimist several times in “Ravaging Tide,” but the label holds only if you consider Paul Revere an optimist. Though the book carries a similar topic and argument to his last one, the pre-Katrina Bayou Farewell, (in which Tidwell quite accurately forecast the catastrophe) you might say that what differentiates the two works, is (1) the pitch of his warning, and (2) the personal responsibility he demonstrates toward the halting the climate change phenomenon.

In the first half of “Ravaging Tide,” Tidwell painstakingly breaks down the factors that led to Katrina’s destruction, and then gradually, he illuminates a path for Americans. It’s a path that Tidwell has been on personally for about five years, since the time of another great American tragedy of this era, 9/11. Like 9/11, the devastation of Katrina is large enough to shape psyche and policy and behavior for generations to come. But will it?

Tidwell makes a compelling case for the direct relationship between our so-called “lifestyle” choices and the fate of the world. Tidwell spent several thousand dollars and about 6 months back in 2001 changing the way he uses energy in his home. The result is not only a remarkable cost and energy savings (his annual average of about 1800 kilowatt hours is approximately half of the usage in most American homes), but also a model for the community.

Tidwell does discuss some of the technologies already available to American communities that would have a large impact on our carbon emissions, technologies like windpower and biofuel. But quite practically, he offers us relatively low-cost examples of domestic tweaks we can implement today that would, one by one, help each of us to “get right with carbon,” if you will.

For $60, Tidwell replaced all of the light bulbs in his house with the compact fluorescent variety, which requires much less wattage. For another $36, he added power strips in his home to make it easier to cut off appliances when they are not in use rather than waste electricity keeping pointless power lights glowing, for example.

Bigger ticket items include the aforementioned corn-burning stove Tidwell purchased for about $2,400, which, in its efficiency, has just about paid for itself. (You’ll enjoy reading how Tidwell helped get a corn granary placed conveniently right outside Takoma Park; TP’s own Mayor Kathy Porter is a hero in the story.) His new Kenmore Energy Star fridge ($750) uses a third of the energy his 10-year old model had been gulping, saving $100 a year off the electricity bill. Rounding out his home equity loan, he added solar panels and a solar water-heating system to his house. These enhancements were most expensive of all, coming to nearly $4,500 for both even though he was able to find them used at a significant savings.

But the result of all these changes is more than a balance sheet of dollars, cents and kilowatt-hours. Tidwell’s home improvement project was an investment of time and cash, sure, but now that it’s long been done, he finds the alternate sources of comfort to be basically invisible. He throws open his doors about once a month to show his interested guests, it’s just a house. I think that’s the reason his ideas are likely to catch on.
Some might say the problem with this book is that it’s preaching to the choir; the people who really need to read it would never crack its spine. It’s true: several times as I read “Ravaging Tide,” I fantasized about what Dick Cheney would say in the face of some of the startling evidence it presents. Like many people in my progressive community, I like to think of myself as a member of the choir, but then, where’s my corn-burning stove? What can I do to get right with carbon? I was inspired by this book to make several personal changes that, hopefully, will one day soon be commonplace.

Posted by blogmom at 06:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Dear EarthTalk: Is it true that nothing really “biodegrades” in a landfill?

— Laura, via e-mail

Organic substances “biodegrade” when they are broken down by other living organisms (such as enzymes and microbes) into their constituent parts, and in turn recycled by nature as the building blocks for new life. The process can occur aerobically (with the aid of oxygen) or anaerobically (without oxygen). Substances break down much faster under aerobic conditions, as oxygen helps break the molecules apart.
Most landfills are fundamentally anaerobic because they are compacted so tightly and thus do not let much air in. As such, any biodegradation that does take place does so very slowly. “Typically in landfills, there’s not much dirt, very little oxygen, and few if any microorganisms,” says green consumer advocate and author Debra Lynn Dadd. She cites a landfill study conducted by University of Arizona researchers that uncovered still-recognizable 25-year-old hot dogs, corncobs and grapes in landfills, as well as 50-year-old newspapers that were still readable.
Biodegradable items also may not break down in landfills if the industrial processing they went through prior to their useful days converted them into forms unrecognizable by the microbes and enzymes that facilitate biodegradation. A typical example is petroleum, which biodegrades easily and quickly in its original form, crude oil. But when petroleum is processed into plastic, it is no longer biodegradable, and as such can clog up landfills indefinitely.
Some manufacturers make claims that their products are photodegradable, which means that they will biodegrade when exposed to sunlight. A popular example is the plastic “polybag” in which many magazines now arrive protected in the mail. But the likelihood that such items will be exposed to sunlight while buried dozens of feet deep in a landfill is little to none. And if they do biodegrade at all, it is only likely to be into smaller pieces of plastic.
Some landfills are now being designed to promote biodegradation through the injection of water, oxygen, and even microbes. But these kinds of facilities are costly to create and as a result have not caught on. Another recent development involves landfills that have separate sections for compostable materials, such as food scraps and yard waste. Some analysts believe that as much as 65 percent of the waste currently sent to landfills in North America consists of such “biomass” that biodegrades rapidly and could generate a new income stream for landfills, marketable soil.
But getting people to sort their trash accordingly is another matter entirely. Indeed, paying heed to the importance of the environment’s “Three Rs” (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle!) is likely the best approach to solving the problems caused by our ever-growing piles of trash. With landfills around the world reaching capacity, technological fixes are not likely to make our waste disposal problems go away.

CONTACTS: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Reduce-Reuse-Recycle page; www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/reduce.htm.

Dear EarthTalk: In what ways is global warming already affecting us in North America?

— Tyler Merson, New York, NY

There are many examples of climate change’s real and present impact. For one, the 20 hottest years since record keeping began in the 1880s have all occurred since 1983, and until this year 2005 was the hottest year ever. Now, according to a new U.S. climate report, 2006 is well on its way to taking the top spot.
If you like New England’s maple syrup, you’ll be dismayed to know that producers report seeing global warming’s effect on their seasonal harvesting cycles. Farmers are tapping their trees a month earlier than their ancestors did, and some fear that global warming will eventually reduce the trees’ ability to produce high-quality sap. “I think the sugar maple industry is on its way out,” says University of New Hampshire professor Barrett Rock, who led research on regional risks related to climate change.
Some ski resorts in the Pacific Northwest blame global warming for the warm weather that shut down the 2004-2005 season before it even began. University of Washington professor of atmospheric sciences Cliff Mass reports that less snow has been falling in Washington State for the last 20 years. “Global warming is occurring,” he concludes. Also in trouble due to declining snow are New England and Midwestern resorts.
The loss of sandy beaches due to climate-aggravated sea level rises is also troubling, and the problem is accelerating. The National Science Foundation’s Metro East Coast report says that beach erosion will likely double by the 2020s, increase from three- to six-fold by the 2050s and by as much as 10-fold by the 2080s. Already, sand loss has led to large beach replenishment efforts by the Army Corps of Engineers.
And keep plenty of calamine lotion on hand. Researchers at Duke University found that some vines—including poison ivy—may thrive exponentially in a warmer climate. Experiments showed that poison ivy growing in a carbon dioxide-rich environment grew about three times larger than normal and produced significantly more urushiol, the allergenic substance that causes rashes.
Another indicator of increased warming is the retreat of glaciers across western North America. This troubling phenomenon is especially noticeable in the Waterton-Glacier park complex on the U.S.-Canada border. Several major glaciers there have shrunk by half or more in recent decades. On the U.S. side of the border, the number of glaciers in Glacier National Park has dropped from 150 in 1850 to 35 today.
Wildlife is also feeling the heat. A 2004 study by the Wildlife Society, a 9,000-member group of wildlife professionals, found that global warming is affecting many North American species and could cause major shifts in ecosystems. The group concluded that caribou, polar bears, migratory songbirds and other species have already responded to climate change by shifting habitat, altering their breeding patterns or changing their migration routes.
Finally, stronger storms like Hurricane Katrina in recent years may be partially explained by global warming. Researchers have found that both the intensity and number of category 4 and 5 storms have greatly increased in the past 35 years, and have linked that phenomenon to warming ocean temperatures.

CONTACT: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, www.ipcc.ch.

Dear EarthTalk: I heard that Coca-Cola is depleting ground water around bottling plants in India so surrounding villages have no safe water supply? Is this true?

—Dan Ehl, Centerville, IA

An ongoing drought has threatened groundwater supplies across India, and many villagers in rural areas are blaming Coca-Cola for aggravating the problem. Coke operates 52 water-intensive bottling plants in India. In the southern Indian village of Plachimada in Kerala state, for example, persistent droughts have dried up local wells, forcing many residents to rely on water supplies trucked in daily by the government.
Some there link the dry wells to the arrival of a Coca-Cola bottling plant in the area three years ago. Following several large protests, the local government revoked Coca-Cola’s license to operate last year, and ordered the company to shut down its $25 million plant.
Similar problems have plagued the company in the rural Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, where farming is the primary industry. Several thousand residents took part in a 10-day march in 2004 between two Coca-Cola bottling plants thought to be depleting groundwater. “Drinking Coke is like drinking farmer’s blood in India,” said protest organizer Nandlal Master. “Coca-Cola is creating thirst in India, and is directly responsible for the loss of livelihood and even hunger for thousands of people across India,” added Master, who represents the India Resource Center in the campaign against Coca-Cola.
Indeed, one report, in the daily newspaper Mathrubhumi, described local women having to travel five kilometers (three miles) to obtain drinkable water, during which time soft drinks would come out of the Coca-Cola plant by the truckload.
Water isn’t the only issue. The Central Pollution Control Board of India found in 2003 that sludge from the Uttar Pradesh factory was contaminated with high levels of cadmium, lead and chromium. To make matters worse, Coke was offloading cadmium-laden waste sludge as “free fertilizer” to tribal farmers who live near the plant, prompting questions as to why they would do that but not provide clean water to local residents whose underground supplies were being “stolen.”
Another Indian nonprofit group, the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), says it tested 57 carbonated beverages made by Coca-Cola and Pepsi at 25 bottling plants and found a “cocktail of between three to five different pesticides in all samples.” CSE Director Sunita Narain, winner of the 2005 Stockholm Water Prize, described the group’s findings as “a grave public health scandal.”
For its part, Coca-Cola says that “a small number of politically motivated groups” are going after the company “for the furtherance of their own anti-multinational agenda.” It denies that its actions in India have contributed to depleting local aquifers, and calls allegations “without any scientific basis.”

CONTACTS: India Resource Center, www.indiaresource.org; Coca-Cola India, www.coca-colaindia.com.

GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION?
Send it to:

EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine

P.O. Box 5098

Westport, CT 06881
Or submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com.
Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.

Posted by blogmom at 06:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

"In 39 years, I have never written these words in a movie review,
but here they are: 'You owe it to yourself to see "An Inconvenient Truth". If you do not, and you have grandchildren, you should explain to them why you decided not to.' "
--Roger Ebert

Come to a Screening of Gore’s global warming documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth” in Takoma Park on Tuesday, October 3rd.

Humanity is sitting on a time bomb. If the vast majority of the world's scientists are right, we have just ten years to avert a major catastrophe that could send our entire planet into a tail-spin of epic destruction involving extreme weather, floods, droughts, epidemics and killer heat waves beyond anything we have ever experienced.

With wit, smarts and hope, AN INCOVENIENT TRUTH ultimately brings home Gore's persuasive argument that we can no longer afford to view global warming as a political issue - rather, it is simply one of the biggest moral challenges facing every person in our times.

On Tuesday, October 3rd, Takoma Park Presbyterian Church will host a screening of “An Inconvenient Truth.” The screening begins at 7pm sharp and will be followed by a discussion led by Mike Tidwell about how global warming will affect you and what you can do about it. Mike is the director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, a local group dedicated to fighting global warming in Maryland, Virginia and DC.

Don’t miss the chance to see this life-changing movie in your neighborhood!

WHAT: Screening of Gore’s global warming documentary film, “An Inconvenient Truth”

WHEN: 7:00pm on Tuesday, October 3rd.

WHERE: Takoma Park Presbyterian Church, 310 Tulip Ave., Takoma Park, MD 20912

Posted by Anne Haverman at 03:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)