Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the Environment

Expand Messages
  • Polly Ledvina
    I didn t expect the Gallon Letter would antagonize members of this group. Actually, I thought most would relate. I was obviously wrong. Three people are
    Message 1 of 9 , Feb 11, 2002
      I didn't expect the Gallon Letter would antagonize members of this group.
      Actually, I thought most would relate. I was obviously wrong. Three people
      are extremely irate and calling it trash (although none have clarified what
      part did not make sense) and nobody has spoken up for any truth that might
      be there. After re-reading it I still don't see what there is to disagree
      with. Can anyone enlighten me? Feel free to write privately lest we
      "create more distraction and distress."

      Polly



      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Claude Foster" <ccfoster@...>
      To: <hreg@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 7:36 AM
      Subject: RE: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
      Environment


      Don't take me off the mailing list but this trash should be disposed
      properly sothat it will not create more distraction and distress.

      Claude

      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Marion Cole [SMTP:mcole07@...]
      > Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 5:34 PM
      > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
      Environment
      >
      > Please Unsubscribe me from this list. This is a perfect example of why
      renewable energy is going nowhere. Few facts and lots of politics.
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Polly Ledvina <mailto:pledvina@...>
      > To: HREG <mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 7:36 AM
      > Subject: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the Environment
      >
      >
      > From: Gary Gallon <mailto:cibe@...>
      >
      >
      > THE GALLON ENVIRONMENT LETTER
      > 506 Victoria Ave., Montreal,
      Quebec H3Y 2R5
      > Ph. (514) 369-0230, Fax
      (514) 369-3282
      > Email
      cibe@... <mailto:cibe@...>
      > Vol. 6, No.
      2, February 8, 2002
      >
      >
      ***********************************************************************
      >
      > ENRON MISMANAGEMENT HARMED THE ENVIRONMENT
      >
      > Enron Corp., not only mismanaged its finances, ruined pension investments
      for thousands of people. Not only did it "cook the books" and make many of
      its executives rich beyond their wildest dreams, while at the same time
      bankrupting the company, but also Enron and some of its key executives
      harmed the environment and harmed the development of environmentally-sound
      energy source development. How did the Enron executives harm the
      environment?
      >
      > First, Enron, led by CEO Kenneth L. Lay, lobbied for oil, coal, and
      natural gas energy development over solar, wind, and other renewable energy
      sources. Ken Lay was a close friend of then-Governor George W. Bush and
      later, President Bush. He worked closely with Bush and his Vice President,
      Dick Cheney on energy issues first in Texas and, later, during the
      development of the National Energy Plan. While Bush and Cheney continue to
      use the Watergate argument not to release the names of those with whom they
      met with on the development of the oil-coal-& gas laden energy plan,
      investigators did learn that Lay met several times with Cheney and the
      National Energy Plan group helping to rule out renewables.
      >
      > Secondly, there is some concern that Enron, with others was able to
      inflate the price of electricity in California during the energy crisis and
      artificially hold the price up until the time Enron began to collapse. The
      extremely high prices of electricity brought California Edison and Pacific
      Gas & Electricity (PG&E) to the edge of bankruptcy. The massive losses and
      the high contracts California was locked into resulted in a slowdown for the
      support for wind and other renewables in California by the two companies and
      by the state.
      >
      > Thirdly, Enron and Ken Lay lobbied heavily for the placement of their
      people in high places in government, meaning that they will likely push for
      oil, coal and gas over environmentally-sound energy sources. Time Magazine
      reported that, "there were ex-Enron chiefs and consultants salted around the
      Bush Administration from the Army Secretary, Thomas White, to the U.S. Trade
      Representative, Robert Zoellick. And last Summer Bush chose Pat Wood, a man
      strongly backed by Ken Lay, to be his top energy price regulator,"as
      Chairman of the Federal Electrical Regulatory Commission (FERC). Thomas
      White used to be the Vice Chairman of Enron Energy Services. The environment
      group, Public Citizen, has been fighting his decision to privatize energy
      services to the Armed Forces, favouring oil and coal sources. Source, "Enron
      Spoils the Party," by Michael Duffy and John F. Dickerson, Time Magazine,
      New York, February 4, 2002. >
      >
      > **************************************************************************
      >
      > NEW REPORT REVEALS ENRON'S MISMANAGEMENT
      >
      > While advocating free enterprise, Enron appears to have abused free
      enterprise. It had so much business freedom, Enron used it to apparently
      abuse business practices and to hide huge losses. A 217-page report filed
      February 1, 2002, with the federal Bankruptcy Court in New York, written by
      a committee headed by Dr. William C. Powers Jr., the Dean of the University
      of Texas Law School which included Raymond S. Troubh and Herbert S. Winkur
      Jr. reported, "an across-the-board failure of controls and ethics at almost
      every level of the company." The report found that, "a culture emerged of
      self-dealing and self-enrichment at the expense of the energy company's
      shareholders. Accountants and lawyers signed off on flawed and improper
      decisions every step of the way." It found that, "the transactions, which
      resulted in the collapse of the company were caused by a flawed idea,
      self-enrichment by employees, inadequately designed controls, poor
      implementation, inattentive oversight, simple and not so simple accounting
      mistakes, and overreaching in a culture that appears to have encouraged
      pushing the limits." The report goes on to say that, "Kenneth lay bears
      significant responsibility for those flawed decisions, as well as for
      Enron's failure to implement sufficiently rigorous procedural controls to
      prevent the abuses that flowed from this inherent conflict of interest."
      This type of widespread abuse by Enron has distorted the ability of honest
      free enterprise companies to introduce renewable energy and conservation. It
      has placed a chill on the investment in new sources of energy. Source,
      "Report: Executives in It for Themselves", by Kurt Eichenwald, New York
      Times News Service, February 3, 2002.
      >
      > **************************************************************************
      > HOW DID ENRON DO IT?
      >
      > Enron's CEO, Kenneth Lay made special friends with George W. Bush and
      provided huge financial contributions through Enron and his other companies
      to Bush and other Republican party members. Three out of every four dollars
      went to the Republicans with the remainder going to the Democrats. The New
      York Times reported that, "with Bush's ascension to the presidency, Ken Lay
      had a private meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney on the
      administration's energy policy. As early as 1992, Lay became the co-chairman
      of then President Bush senior's re-election campaign. In all, Lay and Enron
      have given nearly US$575,000 to George W. Bush's various political
      campaigns. Enron also donated US $1.9 million in soft money to the national
      political parties, of which $1.5 million went to the Republicans. Lay was an
      early supporter of Bush's shaky presidential campaign, contributing more
      than $100,000 in the beginning and eventually placing Enron's entire
      political action committee behind Bush. Source, "Lay Had Friends in High
      Places," New York Times News Service, Houston, February 3, 2002. It was
      learned also that senior Enron staff had at least seven meetings with Dick
      Cheney and his staff on the National Energy Plan. In March 2001, Kenneth Lay
      met directly with Dick Cheney. Then on March 29, 2001 Cheney> '> s top
      energy aide, Andrew Lundquist, met with members of the Clean Power Group, a
      coalition funded by five power companies that included Enron. An additional
      five other meetings were held between Enron representatives and Cheney> '> s
      staff. Source, "A New Capitol Clash, by Martha Brant and Tamara Lipper,
      Newsweek Magazine, New York, February 11, 2002.
      >
      > *************************************************************************
      >
      > U.S. EPA CRITICIZES CHENEY> '> S NATIONAL ENERGY PLAN
      >
      > In an internal memo the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US
      EPA) criticized Vice President Dick Cheney> '> s National Energy Plan. The
      3-page memo was written by Tom Gibson, US EPA Associate Administrator for
      Policy, Economics and Innovation. Commenting on what was then Chapter 8 of
      the National Energy Plan the memo stated, "costs of compliance with
      environmental requirements are overstated, several inaccurate statements and
      opinions are presented as factual, and no citations are provided for many of
      these statements." It went on to state that, "we are very concerned that
      this language is inaccurate and inaapropriately implicates environmental
      programs as a major cause of supply constraints in the United States> '>
      refining capacity." The memo also stated that, "statements regarding
      coal-generated electricity create the false impression that environmental
      regulations are the sole cause of the decrease in investment in new coal
      generation." Source, "EPA Initially Blasted White House Energy Plan", by
      Traci Watson, USA Today, McLean, Virginia, February 6, 2002.
      >
      > *************************************************************************
      >
      > THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY WARNS OF BUSH'S ANTI-ENVIRONMENT MOVES
      >
      > The very old (founded in 1935), large, and U.S. conservative conservation
      organization, The Wilderness Society, has issued an unusual warning and
      action alert about the anti-environmental movements of the George W. Bush
      administration. The Wilderness Society stated that it, "found that, on
      issue after issue, the president and his appointees have failed to safeguard
      our air, water, land, and wildlife, siding instead with those interests
      eager to make a quick profit. We've concluded that informed and aroused
      activists like you, along with a vigilant Congress, are essential to blunt
      the administration's anti-environmental actions." It stated that, "while our
      country wisely focuses on countering terrorism, the Bush administration
      continues to move at full speed to implement its anti-environmental
      agenda -- mostly under the radar. Since September 11, Interior Secretary
      Gale Norton and others have invoked "national security" to justify massive
      oil development not only in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but also on
      fragile western public lands across the lower 48 states. But homeland
      security includes wildland protection. The clean air and water, biological
      diversity, and inspiration that our national parks, wilderness, and other
      natural reserves provide are of vital importance." It stated that, "the
      truly patriotic course of action is not to plunder the most stunning lands
      we have inherited, but to protect them. Each generation serves as trustee of
      these natural treasures, and this administration is breaching that trust."
      >
      > The Wilderness Society warned that, "the White House is championing an
      energy plan that is a half-century out of date and appears to draw more on
      the advice of Enron and other fossil-fuel industry executives than on anyone
      else's. Under this blueprint, our environment would be sacrificed in a host
      of ways. The new administration has ignored or misstated findings of the
      scientific community. Scientists extol the value of roadless forests, but
      the Bush administration is trying to undermine the policy that would protect
      58.5 million acres of roadless national forest lands. Interior Secretary
      Norton gave inaccurate testimony to Congress on Arctic caribou calving
      facts, claiming later that it was a typo. She told the U.S. Army Corps of
      Engineers that she supported its wetlands proposals -- but failed to pass
      along criticism from biologists at the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service."
      >
      > Many, many appointees to key positions in the Administration are former
      lobbyists or employees of powerful timber, oil and gas, coal mining, and
      energy companies. They include: Mark Rey, Steven Griles, James Connaughton,
      James Cason, William Myers, Paul Hoffman, Drue Pierce, Rebecca Watson,
      Bennet Raley, and Camden Toohey. Read their bios on-line at >
      <http://www.wilderness.org/newsroom/rls012402.htm> . You can download the
      full report from <http://www.wilderness.org/newsroom/rls012402.htm> .
      >
      > *************************************************************************
      >
      > PESTICIDES INCREASE CANCER IN FARM WORKERS - UFW
      >
      > A new study by the United Farm Workers (UFW) in California found increased
      cancer rates in those Hispanics that worked in the farm fields than in those
      Hispanics that did not. The study, entitled, "Cancer Incidences in the
      United Farm Workers of America, 1987-1997," was published in the December
      2001 issue of the American Journal of Industrial Medicine. The study linked
      the UFW medical and pension plan records with the database of the California
      Cancer Registry. It found that the risk of major forms of cancer such as
      breast, lung, and prostate cancer were higher in those who worked in farm
      operations. The study was headed by Dr. Paul Mills, an epidemiologist of the
      California Cancer Registry. UFW workers had a 59 percent higher risk for
      leukemia, and a 69 percent higher risk for stomach cancer than the general
      Latino population in California. Uterine cancers in females were also
      elevated in farm workers, as was brain cancer for both males and females,
      the report showed. "The study validates the many other studies that have
      been done over the years that there is a correlation between pesticides and
      the health of farm workers," said Douglas Blaylock, Administrator of the
      UFW's Medical Plan. Large farm operations use many types of pesticides and
      chemicals including those that kill bugs, prevent weed growth, control the
      dropping or ripening of fruit, etc. Any one of these chemicals, or a
      combination of them over a long period of time may increase the likelihood
      of cancer and other chemical-induced diseases in humans. Source, "UFW Study
      Shows Farm Workers Have Higher Risk of Getting Cancer," by Olivia Reyes
      Garcia, The Bakersfield Californian, February 4, 2002.
      >
      > ************************************************************************
      >
      > MEXICO DANGEROUS TO DO BUSINESS IN
      >
      > A new wire story out of Mexico City by Associated Press reveals that
      Mexico is becoming a dangerous place in which to do business. Mexico is
      catching up with Colombia as the business-man kidnapping capital of the
      world. More and more business executives, both Mexican and foreign are being
      kidnapped for small and large ransoms. Many of the crimes are committed with
      the complicity of the Mexican police. Many of the judges are paid-off to
      give no or light sentences to kidnappers. This information is miportant for
      the environment companies that may wish to do business in Mexico. There are
      risks. AP reports a raising number of kidnappings in 2001, reporting that it
      escalated in 1996 with the kidnapping of Mamoru Konno, a top executive of
      Sanyo Video Components USA. "His company paid a US$2 million for his release
      8 days after his capture. In 1997, the year was highlighted by the
      kidnapping of New York native Vincent Carrozza, a hotel manager in Acapulco.
      He was kidnapped by 10 heavily armed emn and held for eight days when his
      family finally paid a ransom. AP reported that Jose Antonio Ortega, a public
      safety adviser for the Mexican Employers Confederation stated, "that there
      is great concern on the part of foreigners about what is happening." AP
      reported that, "experts say that most kidnappings are conducted by loosely
      organized gangs, drug traffickers looking for alternate business ventures,
      common criminals and even middle-class professionals who see kidnapping as a
      way to make a quick buck overnight." AP reports that Mexico's President,
      Vicente Fox, is attempting to take action to reduce kidnapping and other
      crimes in Mexico. For example, "he has replaced the federal judicial police,
      the most corrupt of all Mexico's police forces, with a national police force
      similar to the FBI." Source, "Kidnapping is King of Mexican Crimes: Rampant
      Police Corruption Worsens Problem as Criminals Target rich, Poor, by Lisa J.
      Adams, The Associated Press, February 3, 2002. >
      >
      > ************************************************************************
      >
      > NEW PROPOSED WTO ITEMS MAY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL HARM TO THE ENVIRONMENT
      >
      > The World Trade Organization (WTO) Doha Ministerial meeting in November
      2001 identified new discussion issues that could result in new threats to
      the environment. In the overtime hours of the meeting, the trade ministers
      of 142 countries stitched together a Ministerial Declaration that allowed
      the following. (1) prepare new language similar to NAFTA's Chapter 11, that
      allows companies to sue governments that try to stop trade harmful to the
      environment. These investor-to-state lawsuits provide corporations with
      rights far above those of citizens or domestic investors. (2) initiating
      negotiations on the elimination of tariffs and non-tariff measures (NTMs,
      commonly known as laws and regulations) that revive the possibility of
      increased exploitation of critical forest areas and promotes the elimination
      of the availability of public policy tools to protect forests. This "Global
      Free Logging Agreement" was a significant issue at the 1999 Seattle
      Ministerial, and poses a threat to ancient forests in Indonesia, Malaysia,
      and Chile. Further, strategies for environmental conservation, such as
      eco-labeling, certification, and bans on raw log exports, could come under
      fire in these market access negotiations. (3) Ironically woven into a
      section on the environment is the elimination of tariff and non-tariff
      measures for such industries as hazardous waste landfills, incinerators, and
      water services (since they are considered to be "environmental services").
      The liberalization of these industries could prevent governments from
      placing limits on the number of facilities permitted to operate in a given
      area. (4) the WTO will begin to generate new trade competition rules that
      may adopt language that would be used to challenge environmental laws and
      regulations if they are deemed to be barriers to competition. For more
      information contact Jason Tockman, Director, International Trade Program,
      American Lands Alliance, PO Box 555, Athens, Ohio 45701, ph.
      > (740) 594-5441.
      >
      > **************************************************************************
      >
      > BRUSSELS GROUP OF NATIONS TRIED TO LIMIT IMPACT OF 1972 STOCKHOLM
      ENVIRONMENT CONFERENCE
      >
      > The United Nations Conference on the Environment held in Stockholm,
      Sweden, in 1972, was the first in a series of great world conferences on the
      environment. It was followed by UN world conferences on population, food,
      habitat, energy, etc. The 1972 Stockholm Environment Conference was the
      first, created by a swell of public outrage at the unremitant pollution of
      the environment, with no controls, by forest, mining, oil and chemical
      industries. Citizens were calling for unprecedented government action and
      laws to control the polluters. We celebrate Stockholm every ten years by
      holding special international conferences. The last was in Rio in 1992. The
      next is in South Africa this year to celebrate 30 years after Stockholm and
      to monitor international progress towards cleaning up the environment. The
      United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) based in Nairobi, Kenya, was
      created as a result of the Stockholm Conference.
      >
      > That's why it has come as a stunning revelation that many of the OECD
      nations including the United States, the U.K., Italy, Belgium, the
      Netherlands, France and Germany, formed the "Brussels Group" to try to limit
      the effectiveness of the decisions and actions that would be taken in
      Stockholm in 1972. The existence of this cabal, known as the Brussels group,
      was revealed in 30-year-old British government records that were kept secret
      until December 2001. > The group was "an unofficial policy-making body to
      concert the views of the principal governments concerned", according to a
      note of one of the group's first meetings written by a civil servant in the
      British Foreign and Commonwealth Office. "It will have to remain informal
      and confidential." This meeting took p> lace in July 1971, nearly a year
      before the Stockholm conference opened. The group was concerned that
      environmental regulations would restrict trade. It wanted to stop UNEP from
      being an effective world body and limit its annual budget so that it
      couldn't function as properly as other UN agencies such as UNICEF and FAO.
      British Foreign Office papers say the group "made real progress on this
      difficult problem", though without specifying how this was done. The notes
      record that Canada's Maurice Strong, Chairman of the UN Stockholm
      Environment Conference and Director General of the Rio "20" After Stockholm
      Conference in Brazil, had already been grumbling about the group's negative
      activities in 1971. "We may get some criticism from the Swedes and others
      [and] we must be careful when expanding the group not to include awkward
      bedfellows," the note adds. Another memo, written by an official in what was
      then the U.K. Department of the Environment, it says that Britain wanted to
      restrict the scope of the Stockholm conference and reduce the number of
      proposals for action. In an indirect reference to what would later become
      UNEP, the paper says a "new and expensive international organisation must be
      avoided, but a small effective central coordinating mechanism ... would not
      be welcome but is probably inevitable". For the full story see the website
      <http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991734> .
      >
      > *******************************************************************
      >
      > RENEWABLE ENERGY GROWING FAST IN COUNTRIES THAT SUPPORT IT
      >
      > Why has wind energy grown faster in Germany than Britain, and energy from
      solar panels expanded more quickly in Spain than Greece? A new report from
      the European Environment Agency (EEA) identifies factors that can influence
      the success or otherwise of renewable energy projects. Renewable energies:
      success stories aims to facilitate greater use of renewable energy sources
      and contribute to efforts by the European Union (EU) and its Member States
      to meet targets for increasing power from renewables by 2010. This is part
      of the EU efforts to meet the Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing greenhouse
      gas emissions (GHG) from burning oil, coal, and natural gas for energy. The
      report focuses on how much each EU country managed to expand its use between
      1993 and 1999 of a number of renewable energy technologies - solar
      photovoltaic panels, solar thermal heating, wind and certain uses of biomass
      (wood and crops). The study identifies essential elements for success in
      seven areas: political, legislative, fiscal, financial and administrative
      support, technological development, and information, education and training.
      It concludes that the key to success lies in the combined effect of support
      measures rather than in any single factor. The winning combinations vary
      from one technology to another. The success stories include the expansion of
      solar thermal energy and biomass-fueled district heating in Austria, wind
      energy and biomass power in Denmark, photovoltaics, solar thermal and wind
      energy in Germany, photovoltaics and wind energy in Spain and biomass
      district heating in Sweden, said EEA Executive Director Domingo Jiménez-
      Beltrán. The report was released at the European Parliament in Brussels at a
      meeting of the European Forum for Renewable Energy Sources (EUROFORES) and
      the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC). The study and the executive
      summary can be downloaded from the EEA website at
      <">http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_issue_report_2001_27/en/>
      <http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_issue_report_2001_27/en/>.
      >
      > *********************************************************************
      >
      > EUROPEAN UNION SET RENEWABLE ENERGY TARGET OF 12% OF TOTAL ENERGY
      PRODUCTION
      >
      > > The EU has set itself an indicative target of producing 12% of its
      energy (both electricity and heat) and 22.1% of its electricity from
      renewable sources by 2010. Indicative national renewable electricity targets
      for each Member State are also included in the recently adopted EU>
      renewable electricity Directive (2001/77/EC). For more information contact
      Tony Carritt, Media Relations Manager/Responsable des relations avec les
      médias, European Environment Agency/Agence européenne pour l'environnement ,
      Kongens Nytorv 6, 1050 Copenhagen K, Denmark, Tel (direct): +45 3336 7147,
      Mobile: +45 2368 3669, Fax: +45 3336 7198. Visit the EEA's press room at
      <http://org.eea.eu.int/PR> .
      >
      >
      ****************************************************************************
      >
      > SEATTLE CITY LIGHT IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMITS TO 50-MW WIND POWER
      PURCHASE
      >
      > Seattle City Council members unanimously approved Mayor Paul Schell's
      proposal to become the largest municipal utility purchaser of wind power in
      the nation. The city will begin buying 50 MW of capacity from PacifiCorp
      Power Marketing (PPM)--about 5% of the utility's load--from the Stateline
      Wind Farm beginning January 1, 2002. The purchase is set to increase to 100
      MW in August, 2002, and possibly to 175 MW by August, 2004. "This is a great
      opportunity for our utility," said City Council member Heidi Wills, chair of
      the Council's Energy and Environmental Policy Committee. "Wind power
      diversifies our energy portfolio and gives us another clean, efficient
      renewable resource to complement our hydroelectric power." The price for the
      energy generated in January, including delivery costs, will be less than 5
      cents per kWh and is comparable to costs for electricity generated by
      natural-gas-powered turbines. They also demonstrate that wind is clearly
      competitive, provide strong incentives to leverage future wind resource
      development, and inform regional discussions as to the costs of turning the
      intermittent wind resource into a firm, more practicably usable product."
      >
      > **************************************************************************
      >
      > CHEVRON/TEXACO TO INVEST IN SOLAR ENERGY EXPANSION
      >
      > The energy services subsidiary of the ChevronTexaco oil company, Chevron
      Energy Solutions LP, is collaborating with its manufacturing affiliate,
      Energy Conversion Devices Inc, to broaden the commercial application of
      flexible solar electric roofing materials and nickel-metal hydride (NiMH)
      batteries, as well as hydrogen storage systems and fuel cells. The full
      story can be read at:
      <http://www.solaraccess.com/news/story.jsp?storyid=1313> .
      >
      > **************************************************************************
      >
      > THREE NEW SKYSCRAPERS IN LONDON, U.K. WILL BE BUILT TO BE ENVIRONMENTALLY
      SOUND
      >
      > UK developer St. George recently unveiled plans for a 49-story building
      that would be Britain's tallest residential high-rise and "greenest"
      skyscraper. If approved, the triple-glazed, mainly glass structure will be
      topped by a 30-foot tall wind generator to provide enough power for the
      building's communal lights, and will use heat exchangers drawing on the
      water table to reduce the need for air conditioning and central heating. The
      building, say architects Broadway Malyan, will use just a third of the
      energy of a comparable building, reduce carbon emissions by up to 66 percent
      and include features like gardens and windows that open. Two other planned
      high-rises billed as ecologically sensitive are a 30-story "bioclimatic
      skyscraper" expected to be built next year in south London, by Malaysian
      architect Ken Yeang, and Norman Foster's 41-story "erotic gherkin" planned
      for the City. Most of Yeang's buildings have been in the tropics; he will
      have a different set of problems in south London, but we can expect a
      building with natural ventilation, natural lighting, and rain and wastewater
      collection systems. From The Guardian (London), 12 Dec 2001 and 14 Dec 2001,
      by John Vidal. Source Chris Hammer, Copyright 2001 Sustainable Design
      Resources.
      >
      > *************************************************************************>
      >
      > VISIT THE USGS WEBSITE ON CHEMICAL CONCENTRATIONS IN U.S. SURFACE WATER
      >
      > The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has new online web maps of
      chemical concentrations in surface water in the United States. This will
      give you chance to learn where polluters are dumping and take corrective
      action. The url is long. If it doesn't work for you just go to the link at
      <http://www.mapcruzin.com/> . Here is how to get there directly:
      <http://orxddwimdn.er.usgs.gov/servlet/page?_pageid=543&_dad=por>
      > tal30&_schema=PORTAL30
      >
      > ************************************************************************
      >
      > RECKLESS COMMERCIAL FISHING PRACTICES NEED TO BE AMENDED
      >
      > For centuries who cared? Commercial fishermen could kill and discard fish,
      seals and whales at will. They could drop damaged fish net overboard and let
      them kill the fish and marine mammals for years later. There were just too
      many fish. They could never be depleted. Now that we know that the bounty of
      fish could be sustained under increasing human pressure is a myth, we must
      change our laws and change ways in order to protect the remaining depleted
      world fishery. Fishing gear that goes on killing long after it has been
      discarded is the scourge of the Pacific Ocean, particularly near the
      Northwestern Hawaiian Islands where the nets threatens already endangered
      Hawaiian monk seals, turtles, and sea birds. The good news is that more than
      60 tons of discarded fishing nets and derelict fishing gear have now been
      recovered from the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands by teams of expert divers.
      The bad news is that there are still more than 100 tons of the stuff out
      there entangling and killing local fish and marine creatures. As a whole,
      the unpopulated Northwestern Hawaiian Islands are quite free of human
      influence. But the pattern of Pacific Ocean currents pushes massive amounts
      of derelict fishing nets and gear onto the widely separated islands. Monk
      seals, especially curious pups, get entangled in the nets and often drown.
      With U.S. $3 million allocated for ocean debris removal, the United States
      National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) deployed three
      chartered commercial vessels in September 2001 for a 90-day clean-up tour.
      NOAA joined forces with the Ocean Conservancy, U.S. Coast Guard, Hawaii Sea
      Grant, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other state and private
      organizations to clean up the waters around the Hawaiian archipelago. It is
      time to regulate the casual ocean disposal of commercial fishing gear.
      Source, Environmental News Network (ENN), December 5, 2001. See the full
      story at <http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/12/12052001/s_45791.asp>
      >
      >
      ***************************************************************************
      >
      > KNOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITIES IN THE COMPANIES YOU INVEST IN
      >
      > The United States Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) requires companies
      lists on the New York Stock Exchange and other U.S. stock exchanges to
      report their environmental liabilities to potential investors. A 1998
      Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) study found that 74 percent of
      publicly-traded companies had failed to adequately disclose the existence of
      environmental legal proceedings in their 10-K registration requirements as
      mandated by the Securities Exchange Commission. In October 2001, the EPA
      launched a campaign for corporate environmental accounting under US SEC
      Regulation S-K. For more information visit the websites
      <http://www.pollutiononline.com/read/nl20010515/427844>, and
      > <http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/sec.pdf> . And now Senator Jefford's has
      proposed a draft bill to have corporations file the financial impact of
      their greenhouse gas emission performance on their quarterly and annual SEC
      10-Q & 10-K filings under SEC Regulation S-K.
      >
      > References:
      > Notice on Public Company Requirements to Disclose Environmental Legal
      Proceedings>
      > <http://es.epa.gov/oeca/main/strategy/oppac_notice.html>
      >
      > Also see the October 1, 2001 US EPA alert on SEC disclosure at the website
      <http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/sec.pdf>
      >
      > See the World Resources Institute report on financial environmental
      departures by US publicly traded pulp manufacturers
      <http://www.wristore.com/pureprofit.html>
      >
      > Publicly traded corporations disclosing financial environmental
      liabilities must have corporate reserves to cover those liabilities under
      SEC regulations. <http://www.law.uc.edu/CCL/regS-K/index.html> . Source,
      Donald Sutherland at email donaldsutherland-iso14000@...
      <mailto:donaldsutherland-iso14000@...> , or phone him at (508)
      497-3676. For more information contact Shiria Venus, Office of Policy
      Analysis and Communication, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
      Washington, D.C., ph. (202) 564-0177.
      >
      > *********************************************************************
      >
      > NEW YORK SUES TWO POWER COMPANIES OVER THEIR AIR POLLUTION
      >
      > New York state filed a federal lawsuit against Niagara Mohawk Holdings,
      Inc. and NRG Energy, Inc. alleging violations of the Clean Air Act at two
      coal-burning power plants in western New York. The suit alleges that the
      Dunkirk and C.R. Huntley coal-burning plants, located in Chautauqua and Erie
      counties, respectively, account for a disproportionate amount of nitrogen
      oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions released by all power plants in the
      state, big factors in both acid rain and smog. The public rightfully expects
      that the Clean Air Act will be vigorously enforced," N.Y. Attorney General
      Eliot Spitzer said in a statement. "We will make sure that power companies
      fully comply with the law and compensate the state for the harm caused by
      acid rain and smog." The state charges that the firms made modifications at
      the power plants without upgrading air pollution controls on the
      smokestacks, as required by law. The two plants were owned and operated by
      Niagara Mohawk, the owner of New York State's second largest utility, until
      1999, when they were sold to NRG. Last July, Niagara Mohawk sued NRG
      claiming the latter is responsible for the cost of bringing the plants into
      compliance with the Clean Air Act. Source, Reuters News Service, Planet Ark.
      See the full story at
      <http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/14003/story.htm> .
      >
      > *************************************************************************
      >
      > ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTING LECTURE GIVEN AT HARVARD
      >
      > One of the world's top figures in environmental accounting gave a lecture
      at the Harvard School of Public Health, September 11, 2001. Dr. Markus
      Stobel, (Institute for Management and the World, University of Augsburg,
      Germany) presented a seminar entitled "Material Flow Oriented Cost
      Accounting: A Tool for Cost Saving Recognition and Environmental
      Protection." This is methodology that has been extensively tested in
      Germany and Japan as a means for companies to seek competitive advantage in
      Eco-Efficient Management. This technique should also work well in
      university programs aimed at greening of the campus since it addresses the
      financial impacts of these programs. For more information about the lecture
      contact Dr. Robert Pojasek, Adjunct Faculty Lecturer, Harvard School of
      Public Health, P.O. Box 1333, East. Arlington, Massachusetts 02474-0071, ph.
      (781) 641-2422, fax (781) 465-6006, email rpojasek@...
      <mailto:rpojasek@...> . Visit their website at
      <http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/facres/pojasek.html> .
      >
      >
      xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
      >
      Copyright (c) 2002
      > Canadian Institute for
      Business and the >
      > Environment,
      Montreal & Toronto
      > All
      rights reserved.
      >
      xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
      <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > ADVERTISEMENT
      >
      <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=221000.1882886.3382503.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050641
      77:HM/A=965713/R=0/O=1/I=brandr-promo-flowersale-alerts-lrecg/*http://shoppi
      ng.yahoo.com/promotions/flowers/index.html>
      >
      <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=221000.1882886.3382503.1261774/D=egroupmai
      l/S=1705064177:HM/A=965713/rand=990145074>
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
      <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.




      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • Polly Ledvina
      I don t generally make it my business to mail out the Gallon report. I sent this one because I thought it was particularly relevant. All issues have more than
      Message 2 of 9 , Feb 11, 2002
        I don't generally make it my business to mail out the Gallon report. I sent
        this one because I thought it was particularly relevant.

        All issues have more than one side and dialogue is what is required to learn
        all sides. Informative discussions should be possible on list like hreg.
        Truth or Trash, the good thing that should have come from posting the Gallon
        report was the opportunity to learn more sides of the issue - if only those
        who are more knowledgeable had posted intelligent rebuttals instead of just
        getting angry.

        Some very thoughtful responses are now being directed to me personally. I
        encourage those authors to send their letters to the list so that everyone
        might benefit. It would be a service and it's a much better way to combat
        "hype" than anger.

        Polly

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "asa lawrence" <jackasa@...>
        To: <hreg@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 9:56 AM
        Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
        Environment


        > Polly,
        > Please keep me on the list for the Gallon report. I found it very
        > informative & factual. Some people just don't like being bludgeoned over
        > the head with the truth, facts & reality...I don't mind that. Keep it
        > coming!
        > Thanks, AJL
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: Polly Ledvina <pledvina@...>
        > To: <hreg@yahoogroups.com>
        > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:06 AM
        > Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
        > Environment
        >
        >
        > > I didn't expect the Gallon Letter would antagonize members of this
        group.
        > > Actually, I thought most would relate. I was obviously wrong. Three
        > people
        > > are extremely irate and calling it trash (although none have clarified
        > what
        > > part did not make sense) and nobody has spoken up for any truth that
        > might
        > > be there. After re-reading it I still don't see what there is to
        disagree
        > > with. Can anyone enlighten me? Feel free to write privately lest we
        > > "create more distraction and distress."
        > >
        > > Polly
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: "Claude Foster" <ccfoster@...>
        > > To: <hreg@yahoogroups.com>
        > > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 7:36 AM
        > > Subject: RE: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
        > > Environment
        > >
        > >
        > > Don't take me off the mailing list but this trash should be disposed
        > > properly sothat it will not create more distraction and distress.
        > >
        > > Claude
        > >
        > > > -----Original Message-----
        > > > From: Marion Cole [SMTP:mcole07@...]
        > > > Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 5:34 PM
        > > > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
        > > Environment
        > > >
        > > > Please Unsubscribe me from this list. This is a perfect example of
        why
        > > renewable energy is going nowhere. Few facts and lots of politics.
        > > >
        > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > From: Polly Ledvina <mailto:pledvina@...>
        > > > To: HREG <mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com>
        > > > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 7:36 AM
        > > > Subject: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
        > Environment
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > From: Gary Gallon <mailto:cibe@...>
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > THE GALLON ENVIRONMENT LETTER
        > > > 506 Victoria Ave.,
        > Montreal,
        > > Quebec H3Y 2R5
        > > > Ph. (514) 369-0230,
        > Fax
        > > (514) 369-3282
        > > >
        > Email
        > > cibe@... <mailto:cibe@...>
        > > > Vol. 6,
        No.
        > > 2, February 8, 2002
        > > >
        > > >
        > > ***********************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > ENRON MISMANAGEMENT HARMED THE ENVIRONMENT
        > > >
        > > > Enron Corp., not only mismanaged its finances, ruined pension
        > investments
        > > for thousands of people. Not only did it "cook the books" and make many
        of
        > > its executives rich beyond their wildest dreams, while at the same time
        > > bankrupting the company, but also Enron and some of its key executives
        > > harmed the environment and harmed the development of
        environmentally-sound
        > > energy source development. How did the Enron executives harm the
        > > environment?
        > > >
        > > > First, Enron, led by CEO Kenneth L. Lay, lobbied for oil, coal, and
        > > natural gas energy development over solar, wind, and other renewable
        > energy
        > > sources. Ken Lay was a close friend of then-Governor George W. Bush and
        > > later, President Bush. He worked closely with Bush and his Vice
        President,
        > > Dick Cheney on energy issues first in Texas and, later, during the
        > > development of the National Energy Plan. While Bush and Cheney continue
        to
        > > use the Watergate argument not to release the names of those with whom
        > they
        > > met with on the development of the oil-coal-& gas laden energy plan,
        > > investigators did learn that Lay met several times with Cheney and the
        > > National Energy Plan group helping to rule out renewables.
        > > >
        > > > Secondly, there is some concern that Enron, with others was able to
        > > inflate the price of electricity in California during the energy crisis
        > and
        > > artificially hold the price up until the time Enron began to collapse.
        The
        > > extremely high prices of electricity brought California Edison and
        Pacific
        > > Gas & Electricity (PG&E) to the edge of bankruptcy. The massive losses
        and
        > > the high contracts California was locked into resulted in a slowdown for
        > the
        > > support for wind and other renewables in California by the two companies
        > and
        > > by the state.
        > > >
        > > > Thirdly, Enron and Ken Lay lobbied heavily for the placement of their
        > > people in high places in government, meaning that they will likely push
        > for
        > > oil, coal and gas over environmentally-sound energy sources. Time
        Magazine
        > > reported that, "there were ex-Enron chiefs and consultants salted around
        > the
        > > Bush Administration from the Army Secretary, Thomas White, to the U.S.
        > Trade
        > > Representative, Robert Zoellick. And last Summer Bush chose Pat Wood, a
        > man
        > > strongly backed by Ken Lay, to be his top energy price regulator,"as
        > > Chairman of the Federal Electrical Regulatory Commission (FERC). Thomas
        > > White used to be the Vice Chairman of Enron Energy Services. The
        > environment
        > > group, Public Citizen, has been fighting his decision to privatize
        energy
        > > services to the Armed Forces, favouring oil and coal sources. Source,
        > "Enron
        > > Spoils the Party," by Michael Duffy and John F. Dickerson, Time
        Magazine,
        > > New York, February 4, 2002. >
        > > >
        > > >
        > **************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > NEW REPORT REVEALS ENRON'S MISMANAGEMENT
        > > >
        > > > While advocating free enterprise, Enron appears to have abused free
        > > enterprise. It had so much business freedom, Enron used it to apparently
        > > abuse business practices and to hide huge losses. A 217-page report
        filed
        > > February 1, 2002, with the federal Bankruptcy Court in New York, written
        > by
        > > a committee headed by Dr. William C. Powers Jr., the Dean of the
        > University
        > > of Texas Law School which included Raymond S. Troubh and Herbert S.
        Winkur
        > > Jr. reported, "an across-the-board failure of controls and ethics at
        > almost
        > > every level of the company." The report found that, "a culture emerged
        of
        > > self-dealing and self-enrichment at the expense of the energy company's
        > > shareholders. Accountants and lawyers signed off on flawed and improper
        > > decisions every step of the way." It found that, "the transactions,
        which
        > > resulted in the collapse of the company were caused by a flawed idea,
        > > self-enrichment by employees, inadequately designed controls, poor
        > > implementation, inattentive oversight, simple and not so simple
        accounting
        > > mistakes, and overreaching in a culture that appears to have encouraged
        > > pushing the limits." The report goes on to say that, "Kenneth lay bears
        > > significant responsibility for those flawed decisions, as well as for
        > > Enron's failure to implement sufficiently rigorous procedural controls
        to
        > > prevent the abuses that flowed from this inherent conflict of interest."
        > > This type of widespread abuse by Enron has distorted the ability of
        honest
        > > free enterprise companies to introduce renewable energy and
        conservation.
        > It
        > > has placed a chill on the investment in new sources of energy. Source,
        > > "Report: Executives in It for Themselves", by Kurt Eichenwald, New York
        > > Times News Service, February 3, 2002.
        > > >
        > > >
        > **************************************************************************
        > > > HOW DID ENRON DO IT?
        > > >
        > > > Enron's CEO, Kenneth Lay made special friends with George W. Bush and
        > > provided huge financial contributions through Enron and his other
        > companies
        > > to Bush and other Republican party members. Three out of every four
        > dollars
        > > went to the Republicans with the remainder going to the Democrats. The
        New
        > > York Times reported that, "with Bush's ascension to the presidency, Ken
        > Lay
        > > had a private meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney on the
        > > administration's energy policy. As early as 1992, Lay became the
        > co-chairman
        > > of then President Bush senior's re-election campaign. In all, Lay and
        > Enron
        > > have given nearly US$575,000 to George W. Bush's various political
        > > campaigns. Enron also donated US $1.9 million in soft money to the
        > national
        > > political parties, of which $1.5 million went to the Republicans. Lay
        was
        > an
        > > early supporter of Bush's shaky presidential campaign, contributing more
        > > than $100,000 in the beginning and eventually placing Enron's entire
        > > political action committee behind Bush. Source, "Lay Had Friends in High
        > > Places," New York Times News Service, Houston, February 3, 2002. It was
        > > learned also that senior Enron staff had at least seven meetings with
        Dick
        > > Cheney and his staff on the National Energy Plan. In March 2001, Kenneth
        > Lay
        > > met directly with Dick Cheney. Then on March 29, 2001 Cheney> '> s top
        > > energy aide, Andrew Lundquist, met with members of the Clean Power
        Group,
        > a
        > > coalition funded by five power companies that included Enron. An
        > additional
        > > five other meetings were held between Enron representatives and Cheney>
        '>
        > s
        > > staff. Source, "A New Capitol Clash, by Martha Brant and Tamara Lipper,
        > > Newsweek Magazine, New York, February 11, 2002.
        > > >
        > > >
        > *************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > U.S. EPA CRITICIZES CHENEY> '> S NATIONAL ENERGY PLAN
        > > >
        > > > In an internal memo the United States Environmental Protection Agency
        > (US
        > > EPA) criticized Vice President Dick Cheney> '> s National Energy Plan.
        The
        > > 3-page memo was written by Tom Gibson, US EPA Associate Administrator
        for
        > > Policy, Economics and Innovation. Commenting on what was then Chapter 8
        of
        > > the National Energy Plan the memo stated, "costs of compliance with
        > > environmental requirements are overstated, several inaccurate statements
        > and
        > > opinions are presented as factual, and no citations are provided for
        many
        > of
        > > these statements." It went on to state that, "we are very concerned that
        > > this language is inaccurate and inaapropriately implicates environmental
        > > programs as a major cause of supply constraints in the United States> '>
        > > refining capacity." The memo also stated that, "statements regarding
        > > coal-generated electricity create the false impression that
        environmental
        > > regulations are the sole cause of the decrease in investment in new coal
        > > generation." Source, "EPA Initially Blasted White House Energy Plan", by
        > > Traci Watson, USA Today, McLean, Virginia, February 6, 2002.
        > > >
        > > >
        > *************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY WARNS OF BUSH'S ANTI-ENVIRONMENT MOVES
        > > >
        > > > The very old (founded in 1935), large, and U.S. conservative
        > conservation
        > > organization, The Wilderness Society, has issued an unusual warning and
        > > action alert about the anti-environmental movements of the George W.
        Bush
        > > administration. The Wilderness Society stated that it, "found that, on
        > > issue after issue, the president and his appointees have failed to
        > safeguard
        > > our air, water, land, and wildlife, siding instead with those interests
        > > eager to make a quick profit. We've concluded that informed and aroused
        > > activists like you, along with a vigilant Congress, are essential to
        blunt
        > > the administration's anti-environmental actions." It stated that, "while
        > our
        > > country wisely focuses on countering terrorism, the Bush administration
        > > continues to move at full speed to implement its anti-environmental
        > > agenda -- mostly under the radar. Since September 11, Interior Secretary
        > > Gale Norton and others have invoked "national security" to justify
        massive
        > > oil development not only in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but
        also
        > on
        > > fragile western public lands across the lower 48 states. But homeland
        > > security includes wildland protection. The clean air and water,
        biological
        > > diversity, and inspiration that our national parks, wilderness, and
        other
        > > natural reserves provide are of vital importance." It stated that, "the
        > > truly patriotic course of action is not to plunder the most stunning
        lands
        > > we have inherited, but to protect them. Each generation serves as
        trustee
        > of
        > > these natural treasures, and this administration is breaching that
        trust."
        > > >
        > > > The Wilderness Society warned that, "the White House is championing an
        > > energy plan that is a half-century out of date and appears to draw more
        on
        > > the advice of Enron and other fossil-fuel industry executives than on
        > anyone
        > > else's. Under this blueprint, our environment would be sacrificed in a
        > host
        > > of ways. The new administration has ignored or misstated findings of the
        > > scientific community. Scientists extol the value of roadless forests,
        but
        > > the Bush administration is trying to undermine the policy that would
        > protect
        > > 58.5 million acres of roadless national forest lands. Interior Secretary
        > > Norton gave inaccurate testimony to Congress on Arctic caribou calving
        > > facts, claiming later that it was a typo. She told the U.S. Army Corps
        of
        > > Engineers that she supported its wetlands proposals -- but failed to
        pass
        > > along criticism from biologists at the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service."
        > > >
        > > > Many, many appointees to key positions in the Administration are
        former
        > > lobbyists or employees of powerful timber, oil and gas, coal mining, and
        > > energy companies. They include: Mark Rey, Steven Griles, James
        > Connaughton,
        > > James Cason, William Myers, Paul Hoffman, Drue Pierce, Rebecca Watson,
        > > Bennet Raley, and Camden Toohey. Read their bios on-line at >
        > > <http://www.wilderness.org/newsroom/rls012402.htm> . You can download
        the
        > > full report from <http://www.wilderness.org/newsroom/rls012402.htm> .
        > > >
        > > >
        > *************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > PESTICIDES INCREASE CANCER IN FARM WORKERS - UFW
        > > >
        > > > A new study by the United Farm Workers (UFW) in California found
        > increased
        > > cancer rates in those Hispanics that worked in the farm fields than in
        > those
        > > Hispanics that did not. The study, entitled, "Cancer Incidences in the
        > > United Farm Workers of America, 1987-1997," was published in the
        December
        > > 2001 issue of the American Journal of Industrial Medicine. The study
        > linked
        > > the UFW medical and pension plan records with the database of the
        > California
        > > Cancer Registry. It found that the risk of major forms of cancer such as
        > > breast, lung, and prostate cancer were higher in those who worked in
        farm
        > > operations. The study was headed by Dr. Paul Mills, an epidemiologist of
        > the
        > > California Cancer Registry. UFW workers had a 59 percent higher risk for
        > > leukemia, and a 69 percent higher risk for stomach cancer than the
        general
        > > Latino population in California. Uterine cancers in females were also
        > > elevated in farm workers, as was brain cancer for both males and
        females,
        > > the report showed. "The study validates the many other studies that have
        > > been done over the years that there is a correlation between pesticides
        > and
        > > the health of farm workers," said Douglas Blaylock, Administrator of the
        > > UFW's Medical Plan. Large farm operations use many types of pesticides
        and
        > > chemicals including those that kill bugs, prevent weed growth, control
        the
        > > dropping or ripening of fruit, etc. Any one of these chemicals, or a
        > > combination of them over a long period of time may increase the
        likelihood
        > > of cancer and other chemical-induced diseases in humans. Source, "UFW
        > Study
        > > Shows Farm Workers Have Higher Risk of Getting Cancer," by Olivia Reyes
        > > Garcia, The Bakersfield Californian, February 4, 2002.
        > > >
        > > >
        ************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > MEXICO DANGEROUS TO DO BUSINESS IN
        > > >
        > > > A new wire story out of Mexico City by Associated Press reveals that
        > > Mexico is becoming a dangerous place in which to do business. Mexico is
        > > catching up with Colombia as the business-man kidnapping capital of the
        > > world. More and more business executives, both Mexican and foreign are
        > being
        > > kidnapped for small and large ransoms. Many of the crimes are committed
        > with
        > > the complicity of the Mexican police. Many of the judges are paid-off to
        > > give no or light sentences to kidnappers. This information is miportant
        > for
        > > the environment companies that may wish to do business in Mexico. There
        > are
        > > risks. AP reports a raising number of kidnappings in 2001, reporting
        that
        > it
        > > escalated in 1996 with the kidnapping of Mamoru Konno, a top executive
        of
        > > Sanyo Video Components USA. "His company paid a US$2 million for his
        > release
        > > 8 days after his capture. In 1997, the year was highlighted by the
        > > kidnapping of New York native Vincent Carrozza, a hotel manager in
        > Acapulco.
        > > He was kidnapped by 10 heavily armed emn and held for eight days when
        his
        > > family finally paid a ransom. AP reported that Jose Antonio Ortega, a
        > public
        > > safety adviser for the Mexican Employers Confederation stated, "that
        there
        > > is great concern on the part of foreigners about what is happening." AP
        > > reported that, "experts say that most kidnappings are conducted by
        loosely
        > > organized gangs, drug traffickers looking for alternate business
        ventures,
        > > common criminals and even middle-class professionals who see kidnapping
        as
        > a
        > > way to make a quick buck overnight." AP reports that Mexico's President,
        > > Vicente Fox, is attempting to take action to reduce kidnapping and other
        > > crimes in Mexico. For example, "he has replaced the federal judicial
        > police,
        > > the most corrupt of all Mexico's police forces, with a national police
        > force
        > > similar to the FBI." Source, "Kidnapping is King of Mexican Crimes:
        > Rampant
        > > Police Corruption Worsens Problem as Criminals Target rich, Poor, by
        Lisa
        > J.
        > > Adams, The Associated Press, February 3, 2002. >
        > > >
        > > >
        ************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > NEW PROPOSED WTO ITEMS MAY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL HARM TO THE
        ENVIRONMENT
        > > >
        > > > The World Trade Organization (WTO) Doha Ministerial meeting in
        November
        > > 2001 identified new discussion issues that could result in new threats
        to
        > > the environment. In the overtime hours of the meeting, the trade
        ministers
        > > of 142 countries stitched together a Ministerial Declaration that
        allowed
        > > the following. (1) prepare new language similar to NAFTA's Chapter 11,
        > that
        > > allows companies to sue governments that try to stop trade harmful to
        the
        > > environment. These investor-to-state lawsuits provide corporations with
        > > rights far above those of citizens or domestic investors. (2) initiating
        > > negotiations on the elimination of tariffs and non-tariff measures
        (NTMs,
        > > commonly known as laws and regulations) that revive the possibility of
        > > increased exploitation of critical forest areas and promotes the
        > elimination
        > > of the availability of public policy tools to protect forests. This
        > "Global
        > > Free Logging Agreement" was a significant issue at the 1999 Seattle
        > > Ministerial, and poses a threat to ancient forests in Indonesia,
        Malaysia,
        > > and Chile. Further, strategies for environmental conservation, such as
        > > eco-labeling, certification, and bans on raw log exports, could come
        under
        > > fire in these market access negotiations. (3) Ironically woven into a
        > > section on the environment is the elimination of tariff and non-tariff
        > > measures for such industries as hazardous waste landfills, incinerators,
        > and
        > > water services (since they are considered to be "environmental
        services").
        > > The liberalization of these industries could prevent governments from
        > > placing limits on the number of facilities permitted to operate in a
        given
        > > area. (4) the WTO will begin to generate new trade competition rules
        that
        > > may adopt language that would be used to challenge environmental laws
        and
        > > regulations if they are deemed to be barriers to competition. For more
        > > information contact Jason Tockman, Director, International Trade
        Program,
        > > American Lands Alliance, PO Box 555, Athens, Ohio 45701, ph.
        > > > (740) 594-5441.
        > > >
        > > >
        > **************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > BRUSSELS GROUP OF NATIONS TRIED TO LIMIT IMPACT OF 1972 STOCKHOLM
        > > ENVIRONMENT CONFERENCE
        > > >
        > > > The United Nations Conference on the Environment held in Stockholm,
        > > Sweden, in 1972, was the first in a series of great world conferences on
        > the
        > > environment. It was followed by UN world conferences on population,
        food,
        > > habitat, energy, etc. The 1972 Stockholm Environment Conference was the
        > > first, created by a swell of public outrage at the unremitant pollution
        of
        > > the environment, with no controls, by forest, mining, oil and chemical
        > > industries. Citizens were calling for unprecedented government action
        and
        > > laws to control the polluters. We celebrate Stockholm every ten years by
        > > holding special international conferences. The last was in Rio in 1992.
        > The
        > > next is in South Africa this year to celebrate 30 years after Stockholm
        > and
        > > to monitor international progress towards cleaning up the environment.
        The
        > > United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) based in Nairobi, Kenya, was
        > > created as a result of the Stockholm Conference.
        > > >
        > > > That's why it has come as a stunning revelation that many of the OECD
        > > nations including the United States, the U.K., Italy, Belgium, the
        > > Netherlands, France and Germany, formed the "Brussels Group" to try to
        > limit
        > > the effectiveness of the decisions and actions that would be taken in
        > > Stockholm in 1972. The existence of this cabal, known as the Brussels
        > group,
        > > was revealed in 30-year-old British government records that were kept
        > secret
        > > until December 2001. > The group was "an unofficial policy-making body
        to
        > > concert the views of the principal governments concerned", according to
        a
        > > note of one of the group's first meetings written by a civil servant in
        > the
        > > British Foreign and Commonwealth Office. "It will have to remain
        informal
        > > and confidential." This meeting took p> lace in July 1971, nearly a year
        > > before the Stockholm conference opened. The group was concerned that
        > > environmental regulations would restrict trade. It wanted to stop UNEP
        > from
        > > being an effective world body and limit its annual budget so that it
        > > couldn't function as properly as other UN agencies such as UNICEF and
        FAO.
        > > British Foreign Office papers say the group "made real progress on this
        > > difficult problem", though without specifying how this was done. The
        notes
        > > record that Canada's Maurice Strong, Chairman of the UN Stockholm
        > > Environment Conference and Director General of the Rio "20" After
        > Stockholm
        > > Conference in Brazil, had already been grumbling about the group's
        > negative
        > > activities in 1971. "We may get some criticism from the Swedes and
        others
        > > [and] we must be careful when expanding the group not to include awkward
        > > bedfellows," the note adds. Another memo, written by an official in what
        > was
        > > then the U.K. Department of the Environment, it says that Britain wanted
        > to
        > > restrict the scope of the Stockholm conference and reduce the number of
        > > proposals for action. In an indirect reference to what would later
        become
        > > UNEP, the paper says a "new and expensive international organisation
        must
        > be
        > > avoided, but a small effective central coordinating mechanism ... would
        > not
        > > be welcome but is probably inevitable". For the full story see the
        website
        > > <http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991734> .
        > > >
        > > > *******************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > RENEWABLE ENERGY GROWING FAST IN COUNTRIES THAT SUPPORT IT
        > > >
        > > > Why has wind energy grown faster in Germany than Britain, and energy
        > from
        > > solar panels expanded more quickly in Spain than Greece? A new report
        from
        > > the European Environment Agency (EEA) identifies factors that can
        > influence
        > > the success or otherwise of renewable energy projects. Renewable
        energies:
        > > success stories aims to facilitate greater use of renewable energy
        sources
        > > and contribute to efforts by the European Union (EU) and its Member
        States
        > > to meet targets for increasing power from renewables by 2010. This is
        part
        > > of the EU efforts to meet the Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing
        > greenhouse
        > > gas emissions (GHG) from burning oil, coal, and natural gas for energy.
        > The
        > > report focuses on how much each EU country managed to expand its use
        > between
        > > 1993 and 1999 of a number of renewable energy technologies - solar
        > > photovoltaic panels, solar thermal heating, wind and certain uses of
        > biomass
        > > (wood and crops). The study identifies essential elements for success in
        > > seven areas: political, legislative, fiscal, financial and
        administrative
        > > support, technological development, and information, education and
        > training.
        > > It concludes that the key to success lies in the combined effect of
        > support
        > > measures rather than in any single factor. The winning combinations vary
        > > from one technology to another. The success stories include the
        expansion
        > of
        > > solar thermal energy and biomass-fueled district heating in Austria,
        wind
        > > energy and biomass power in Denmark, photovoltaics, solar thermal and
        wind
        > > energy in Germany, photovoltaics and wind energy in Spain and biomass
        > > district heating in Sweden, said EEA Executive Director Domingo Jiménez-
        > > Beltrán. The report was released at the European Parliament in Brussels
        at
        > a
        > > meeting of the European Forum for Renewable Energy Sources (EUROFORES)
        and
        > > the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC). The study and the
        executive
        > > summary can be downloaded from the EEA website at
        > > <">http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_issue_report_2001_27/en/>
        > > <http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_issue_report_2001_27/en/>.
        > > >
        > > > *********************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > EUROPEAN UNION SET RENEWABLE ENERGY TARGET OF 12% OF TOTAL ENERGY
        > > PRODUCTION
        > > >
        > > > > The EU has set itself an indicative target of producing 12% of its
        > > energy (both electricity and heat) and 22.1% of its electricity from
        > > renewable sources by 2010. Indicative national renewable electricity
        > targets
        > > for each Member State are also included in the recently adopted EU>
        > > renewable electricity Directive (2001/77/EC). For more information
        contact
        > > Tony Carritt, Media Relations Manager/Responsable des relations avec les
        > > médias, European Environment Agency/Agence européenne pour
        l'environnement
        > ,
        > > Kongens Nytorv 6, 1050 Copenhagen K, Denmark, Tel (direct): +45 3336
        7147,
        > > Mobile: +45 2368 3669, Fax: +45 3336 7198. Visit the EEA's press room at
        > > <http://org.eea.eu.int/PR> .
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
        ****************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > SEATTLE CITY LIGHT IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMITS TO 50-MW WIND
        > POWER
        > > PURCHASE
        > > >
        > > > Seattle City Council members unanimously approved Mayor Paul Schell's
        > > proposal to become the largest municipal utility purchaser of wind power
        > in
        > > the nation. The city will begin buying 50 MW of capacity from PacifiCorp
        > > Power Marketing (PPM)--about 5% of the utility's load--from the
        Stateline
        > > Wind Farm beginning January 1, 2002. The purchase is set to increase to
        > 100
        > > MW in August, 2002, and possibly to 175 MW by August, 2004. "This is a
        > great
        > > opportunity for our utility," said City Council member Heidi Wills,
        chair
        > of
        > > the Council's Energy and Environmental Policy Committee. "Wind power
        > > diversifies our energy portfolio and gives us another clean, efficient
        > > renewable resource to complement our hydroelectric power." The price for
        > the
        > > energy generated in January, including delivery costs, will be less than
        5
        > > cents per kWh and is comparable to costs for electricity generated by
        > > natural-gas-powered turbines. They also demonstrate that wind is clearly
        > > competitive, provide strong incentives to leverage future wind resource
        > > development, and inform regional discussions as to the costs of turning
        > the
        > > intermittent wind resource into a firm, more practicably usable
        product."
        > > >
        > > >
        > **************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > CHEVRON/TEXACO TO INVEST IN SOLAR ENERGY EXPANSION
        > > >
        > > > The energy services subsidiary of the ChevronTexaco oil company,
        Chevron
        > > Energy Solutions LP, is collaborating with its manufacturing affiliate,
        > > Energy Conversion Devices Inc, to broaden the commercial application of
        > > flexible solar electric roofing materials and nickel-metal hydride
        (NiMH)
        > > batteries, as well as hydrogen storage systems and fuel cells. The full
        > > story can be read at:
        > > <http://www.solaraccess.com/news/story.jsp?storyid=1313> .
        > > >
        > > >
        > **************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > THREE NEW SKYSCRAPERS IN LONDON, U.K. WILL BE BUILT TO BE
        > ENVIRONMENTALLY
        > > SOUND
        > > >
        > > > UK developer St. George recently unveiled plans for a 49-story
        building
        > > that would be Britain's tallest residential high-rise and "greenest"
        > > skyscraper. If approved, the triple-glazed, mainly glass structure will
        be
        > > topped by a 30-foot tall wind generator to provide enough power for the
        > > building's communal lights, and will use heat exchangers drawing on the
        > > water table to reduce the need for air conditioning and central heating.
        > The
        > > building, say architects Broadway Malyan, will use just a third of the
        > > energy of a comparable building, reduce carbon emissions by up to 66
        > percent
        > > and include features like gardens and windows that open. Two other
        planned
        > > high-rises billed as ecologically sensitive are a 30-story "bioclimatic
        > > skyscraper" expected to be built next year in south London, by Malaysian
        > > architect Ken Yeang, and Norman Foster's 41-story "erotic gherkin"
        planned
        > > for the City. Most of Yeang's buildings have been in the tropics; he
        will
        > > have a different set of problems in south London, but we can expect a
        > > building with natural ventilation, natural lighting, and rain and
        > wastewater
        > > collection systems. From The Guardian (London), 12 Dec 2001 and 14 Dec
        > 2001,
        > > by John Vidal. Source Chris Hammer, Copyright 2001 Sustainable Design
        > > Resources.
        > > >
        > > >
        > *************************************************************************>
        > > >
        > > > VISIT THE USGS WEBSITE ON CHEMICAL CONCENTRATIONS IN U.S. SURFACE
        WATER
        > > >
        > > > The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has new online web maps of
        > > chemical concentrations in surface water in the United States. This will
        > > give you chance to learn where polluters are dumping and take corrective
        > > action. The url is long. If it doesn't work for you just go to the link
        > at
        > > <http://www.mapcruzin.com/> . Here is how to get there directly:
        > > <http://orxddwimdn.er.usgs.gov/servlet/page?_pageid=543&_dad=por>
        > > > tal30&_schema=PORTAL30
        > > >
        > > >
        ************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > RECKLESS COMMERCIAL FISHING PRACTICES NEED TO BE AMENDED
        > > >
        > > > For centuries who cared? Commercial fishermen could kill and discard
        > fish,
        > > seals and whales at will. They could drop damaged fish net overboard and
        > let
        > > them kill the fish and marine mammals for years later. There were just
        too
        > > many fish. They could never be depleted. Now that we know that the
        bounty
        > of
        > > fish could be sustained under increasing human pressure is a myth, we
        must
        > > change our laws and change ways in order to protect the remaining
        depleted
        > > world fishery. Fishing gear that goes on killing long after it has been
        > > discarded is the scourge of the Pacific Ocean, particularly near the
        > > Northwestern Hawaiian Islands where the nets threatens already
        endangered
        > > Hawaiian monk seals, turtles, and sea birds. The good news is that more
        > than
        > > 60 tons of discarded fishing nets and derelict fishing gear have now
        been
        > > recovered from the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands by teams of expert
        > divers.
        > > The bad news is that there are still more than 100 tons of the stuff out
        > > there entangling and killing local fish and marine creatures. As a
        whole,
        > > the unpopulated Northwestern Hawaiian Islands are quite free of human
        > > influence. But the pattern of Pacific Ocean currents pushes massive
        > amounts
        > > of derelict fishing nets and gear onto the widely separated islands.
        Monk
        > > seals, especially curious pups, get entangled in the nets and often
        drown.
        > > With U.S. $3 million allocated for ocean debris removal, the United
        States
        > > National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) deployed three
        > > chartered commercial vessels in September 2001 for a 90-day clean-up
        tour.
        > > NOAA joined forces with the Ocean Conservancy, U.S. Coast Guard, Hawaii
        > Sea
        > > Grant, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other state and private
        > > organizations to clean up the waters around the Hawaiian archipelago. It
        > is
        > > time to regulate the casual ocean disposal of commercial fishing gear.
        > > Source, Environmental News Network (ENN), December 5, 2001. See the full
        > > story at
        > <http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/12/12052001/s_45791.asp>
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
        ***************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > KNOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITIES IN THE COMPANIES YOU INVEST IN
        > > >
        > > > The United States Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) requires
        > companies
        > > lists on the New York Stock Exchange and other U.S. stock exchanges to
        > > report their environmental liabilities to potential investors. A 1998
        > > Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) study found that 74 percent of
        > > publicly-traded companies had failed to adequately disclose the
        existence
        > of
        > > environmental legal proceedings in their 10-K registration requirements
        as
        > > mandated by the Securities Exchange Commission. In October 2001, the EPA
        > > launched a campaign for corporate environmental accounting under US SEC
        > > Regulation S-K. For more information visit the websites
        > > <http://www.pollutiononline.com/read/nl20010515/427844>, and
        > > > <http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/sec.pdf> . And now Senator Jefford's has
        > > proposed a draft bill to have corporations file the financial impact of
        > > their greenhouse gas emission performance on their quarterly and annual
        > SEC
        > > 10-Q & 10-K filings under SEC Regulation S-K.
        > > >
        > > > References:
        > > > Notice on Public Company Requirements to Disclose Environmental Legal
        > > Proceedings>
        > > > <http://es.epa.gov/oeca/main/strategy/oppac_notice.html>
        > > >
        > > > Also see the October 1, 2001 US EPA alert on SEC disclosure at the
        > website
        > > <http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/sec.pdf>
        > > >
        > > > See the World Resources Institute report on financial environmental
        > > departures by US publicly traded pulp manufacturers
        > > <http://www.wristore.com/pureprofit.html>
        > > >
        > > > Publicly traded corporations disclosing financial environmental
        > > liabilities must have corporate reserves to cover those liabilities
        under
        > > SEC regulations. <http://www.law.uc.edu/CCL/regS-K/index.html> . Source,
        > > Donald Sutherland at email donaldsutherland-iso14000@...
        > > <mailto:donaldsutherland-iso14000@...> , or phone him at
        > (508)
        > > 497-3676. For more information contact Shiria Venus, Office of Policy
        > > Analysis and Communication, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
        > > Washington, D.C., ph. (202) 564-0177.
        > > >
        > > > *********************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > NEW YORK SUES TWO POWER COMPANIES OVER THEIR AIR POLLUTION
        > > >
        > > > New York state filed a federal lawsuit against Niagara Mohawk
        Holdings,
        > > Inc. and NRG Energy, Inc. alleging violations of the Clean Air Act at
        two
        > > coal-burning power plants in western New York. The suit alleges that the
        > > Dunkirk and C.R. Huntley coal-burning plants, located in Chautauqua and
        > Erie
        > > counties, respectively, account for a disproportionate amount of
        nitrogen
        > > oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions released by all power plants in the
        > > state, big factors in both acid rain and smog. The public rightfully
        > expects
        > > that the Clean Air Act will be vigorously enforced," N.Y. Attorney
        General
        > > Eliot Spitzer said in a statement. "We will make sure that power
        companies
        > > fully comply with the law and compensate the state for the harm caused
        by
        > > acid rain and smog." The state charges that the firms made modifications
        > at
        > > the power plants without upgrading air pollution controls on the
        > > smokestacks, as required by law. The two plants were owned and operated
        by
        > > Niagara Mohawk, the owner of New York State's second largest utility,
        > until
        > > 1999, when they were sold to NRG. Last July, Niagara Mohawk sued NRG
        > > claiming the latter is responsible for the cost of bringing the plants
        > into
        > > compliance with the Clean Air Act. Source, Reuters News Service, Planet
        > Ark.
        > > See the full story at
        > > <http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/14003/story.htm> .
        > > >
        > > >
        > *************************************************************************
        > > >
        > > > ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTING LECTURE GIVEN AT HARVARD
        > > >
        > > > One of the world's top figures in environmental accounting gave a
        > lecture
        > > at the Harvard School of Public Health, September 11, 2001. Dr. Markus
        > > Stobel, (Institute for Management and the World, University of Augsburg,
        > > Germany) presented a seminar entitled "Material Flow Oriented Cost
        > > Accounting: A Tool for Cost Saving Recognition and Environmental
        > > Protection." This is methodology that has been extensively tested in
        > > Germany and Japan as a means for companies to seek competitive advantage
        > in
        > > Eco-Efficient Management. This technique should also work well in
        > > university programs aimed at greening of the campus since it addresses
        the
        > > financial impacts of these programs. For more information about the
        > lecture
        > > contact Dr. Robert Pojasek, Adjunct Faculty Lecturer, Harvard School of
        > > Public Health, P.O. Box 1333, East. Arlington, Massachusetts 02474-0071,
        > ph.
        > > (781) 641-2422, fax (781) 465-6006, email rpojasek@...
        > > <mailto:rpojasek@...> . Visit their website at
        > > <http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/facres/pojasek.html> .
        > > >
        > > >
        > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        > > >
        > > Copyright (c) 2002
        > > > Canadian Institute
        > for
        > > Business and the >
        > > > Environment,
        > > Montreal & Toronto
        > > >
        > All
        > > rights reserved.
        > > >
        > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
        > > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        > > > ADVERTISEMENT
        > > >
        > >
        >
        <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=221000.1882886.3382503.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050641
        > >
        >
        77:HM/A=965713/R=0/O=1/I=brandr-promo-flowersale-alerts-lrecg/*http://shoppi
        > > ng.yahoo.com/promotions/flowers/index.html>
        > > >
        > >
        >
        <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=221000.1882886.3382503.1261774/D=egroupmai
        > > l/S=1705064177:HM/A=965713/rand=990145074>
        > > >
        > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
        > > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • asa lawrence
        Polly, Please keep me on the list for the Gallon report. I found it very informative & factual. Some people just don t like being bludgeoned over the head
        Message 3 of 9 , Feb 11, 2002
          Polly,
          Please keep me on the list for the Gallon report. I found it very
          informative & factual. Some people just don't like being bludgeoned over
          the head with the truth, facts & reality...I don't mind that. Keep it
          coming!
          Thanks, AJL
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: Polly Ledvina <pledvina@...>
          To: <hreg@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:06 AM
          Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
          Environment


          > I didn't expect the Gallon Letter would antagonize members of this group.
          > Actually, I thought most would relate. I was obviously wrong. Three
          people
          > are extremely irate and calling it trash (although none have clarified
          what
          > part did not make sense) and nobody has spoken up for any truth that
          might
          > be there. After re-reading it I still don't see what there is to disagree
          > with. Can anyone enlighten me? Feel free to write privately lest we
          > "create more distraction and distress."
          >
          > Polly
          >
          >
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: "Claude Foster" <ccfoster@...>
          > To: <hreg@yahoogroups.com>
          > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 7:36 AM
          > Subject: RE: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
          > Environment
          >
          >
          > Don't take me off the mailing list but this trash should be disposed
          > properly sothat it will not create more distraction and distress.
          >
          > Claude
          >
          > > -----Original Message-----
          > > From: Marion Cole [SMTP:mcole07@...]
          > > Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 5:34 PM
          > > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
          > > Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
          > Environment
          > >
          > > Please Unsubscribe me from this list. This is a perfect example of why
          > renewable energy is going nowhere. Few facts and lots of politics.
          > >
          > > ----- Original Message -----
          > > From: Polly Ledvina <mailto:pledvina@...>
          > > To: HREG <mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com>
          > > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 7:36 AM
          > > Subject: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
          Environment
          > >
          > >
          > > From: Gary Gallon <mailto:cibe@...>
          > >
          > >
          > > THE GALLON ENVIRONMENT LETTER
          > > 506 Victoria Ave.,
          Montreal,
          > Quebec H3Y 2R5
          > > Ph. (514) 369-0230,
          Fax
          > (514) 369-3282
          > >
          Email
          > cibe@... <mailto:cibe@...>
          > > Vol. 6, No.
          > 2, February 8, 2002
          > >
          > >
          > ***********************************************************************
          > >
          > > ENRON MISMANAGEMENT HARMED THE ENVIRONMENT
          > >
          > > Enron Corp., not only mismanaged its finances, ruined pension
          investments
          > for thousands of people. Not only did it "cook the books" and make many of
          > its executives rich beyond their wildest dreams, while at the same time
          > bankrupting the company, but also Enron and some of its key executives
          > harmed the environment and harmed the development of environmentally-sound
          > energy source development. How did the Enron executives harm the
          > environment?
          > >
          > > First, Enron, led by CEO Kenneth L. Lay, lobbied for oil, coal, and
          > natural gas energy development over solar, wind, and other renewable
          energy
          > sources. Ken Lay was a close friend of then-Governor George W. Bush and
          > later, President Bush. He worked closely with Bush and his Vice President,
          > Dick Cheney on energy issues first in Texas and, later, during the
          > development of the National Energy Plan. While Bush and Cheney continue to
          > use the Watergate argument not to release the names of those with whom
          they
          > met with on the development of the oil-coal-& gas laden energy plan,
          > investigators did learn that Lay met several times with Cheney and the
          > National Energy Plan group helping to rule out renewables.
          > >
          > > Secondly, there is some concern that Enron, with others was able to
          > inflate the price of electricity in California during the energy crisis
          and
          > artificially hold the price up until the time Enron began to collapse. The
          > extremely high prices of electricity brought California Edison and Pacific
          > Gas & Electricity (PG&E) to the edge of bankruptcy. The massive losses and
          > the high contracts California was locked into resulted in a slowdown for
          the
          > support for wind and other renewables in California by the two companies
          and
          > by the state.
          > >
          > > Thirdly, Enron and Ken Lay lobbied heavily for the placement of their
          > people in high places in government, meaning that they will likely push
          for
          > oil, coal and gas over environmentally-sound energy sources. Time Magazine
          > reported that, "there were ex-Enron chiefs and consultants salted around
          the
          > Bush Administration from the Army Secretary, Thomas White, to the U.S.
          Trade
          > Representative, Robert Zoellick. And last Summer Bush chose Pat Wood, a
          man
          > strongly backed by Ken Lay, to be his top energy price regulator,"as
          > Chairman of the Federal Electrical Regulatory Commission (FERC). Thomas
          > White used to be the Vice Chairman of Enron Energy Services. The
          environment
          > group, Public Citizen, has been fighting his decision to privatize energy
          > services to the Armed Forces, favouring oil and coal sources. Source,
          "Enron
          > Spoils the Party," by Michael Duffy and John F. Dickerson, Time Magazine,
          > New York, February 4, 2002. >
          > >
          > >
          **************************************************************************
          > >
          > > NEW REPORT REVEALS ENRON'S MISMANAGEMENT
          > >
          > > While advocating free enterprise, Enron appears to have abused free
          > enterprise. It had so much business freedom, Enron used it to apparently
          > abuse business practices and to hide huge losses. A 217-page report filed
          > February 1, 2002, with the federal Bankruptcy Court in New York, written
          by
          > a committee headed by Dr. William C. Powers Jr., the Dean of the
          University
          > of Texas Law School which included Raymond S. Troubh and Herbert S. Winkur
          > Jr. reported, "an across-the-board failure of controls and ethics at
          almost
          > every level of the company." The report found that, "a culture emerged of
          > self-dealing and self-enrichment at the expense of the energy company's
          > shareholders. Accountants and lawyers signed off on flawed and improper
          > decisions every step of the way." It found that, "the transactions, which
          > resulted in the collapse of the company were caused by a flawed idea,
          > self-enrichment by employees, inadequately designed controls, poor
          > implementation, inattentive oversight, simple and not so simple accounting
          > mistakes, and overreaching in a culture that appears to have encouraged
          > pushing the limits." The report goes on to say that, "Kenneth lay bears
          > significant responsibility for those flawed decisions, as well as for
          > Enron's failure to implement sufficiently rigorous procedural controls to
          > prevent the abuses that flowed from this inherent conflict of interest."
          > This type of widespread abuse by Enron has distorted the ability of honest
          > free enterprise companies to introduce renewable energy and conservation.
          It
          > has placed a chill on the investment in new sources of energy. Source,
          > "Report: Executives in It for Themselves", by Kurt Eichenwald, New York
          > Times News Service, February 3, 2002.
          > >
          > >
          **************************************************************************
          > > HOW DID ENRON DO IT?
          > >
          > > Enron's CEO, Kenneth Lay made special friends with George W. Bush and
          > provided huge financial contributions through Enron and his other
          companies
          > to Bush and other Republican party members. Three out of every four
          dollars
          > went to the Republicans with the remainder going to the Democrats. The New
          > York Times reported that, "with Bush's ascension to the presidency, Ken
          Lay
          > had a private meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney on the
          > administration's energy policy. As early as 1992, Lay became the
          co-chairman
          > of then President Bush senior's re-election campaign. In all, Lay and
          Enron
          > have given nearly US$575,000 to George W. Bush's various political
          > campaigns. Enron also donated US $1.9 million in soft money to the
          national
          > political parties, of which $1.5 million went to the Republicans. Lay was
          an
          > early supporter of Bush's shaky presidential campaign, contributing more
          > than $100,000 in the beginning and eventually placing Enron's entire
          > political action committee behind Bush. Source, "Lay Had Friends in High
          > Places," New York Times News Service, Houston, February 3, 2002. It was
          > learned also that senior Enron staff had at least seven meetings with Dick
          > Cheney and his staff on the National Energy Plan. In March 2001, Kenneth
          Lay
          > met directly with Dick Cheney. Then on March 29, 2001 Cheney> '> s top
          > energy aide, Andrew Lundquist, met with members of the Clean Power Group,
          a
          > coalition funded by five power companies that included Enron. An
          additional
          > five other meetings were held between Enron representatives and Cheney> '>
          s
          > staff. Source, "A New Capitol Clash, by Martha Brant and Tamara Lipper,
          > Newsweek Magazine, New York, February 11, 2002.
          > >
          > >
          *************************************************************************
          > >
          > > U.S. EPA CRITICIZES CHENEY> '> S NATIONAL ENERGY PLAN
          > >
          > > In an internal memo the United States Environmental Protection Agency
          (US
          > EPA) criticized Vice President Dick Cheney> '> s National Energy Plan. The
          > 3-page memo was written by Tom Gibson, US EPA Associate Administrator for
          > Policy, Economics and Innovation. Commenting on what was then Chapter 8 of
          > the National Energy Plan the memo stated, "costs of compliance with
          > environmental requirements are overstated, several inaccurate statements
          and
          > opinions are presented as factual, and no citations are provided for many
          of
          > these statements." It went on to state that, "we are very concerned that
          > this language is inaccurate and inaapropriately implicates environmental
          > programs as a major cause of supply constraints in the United States> '>
          > refining capacity." The memo also stated that, "statements regarding
          > coal-generated electricity create the false impression that environmental
          > regulations are the sole cause of the decrease in investment in new coal
          > generation." Source, "EPA Initially Blasted White House Energy Plan", by
          > Traci Watson, USA Today, McLean, Virginia, February 6, 2002.
          > >
          > >
          *************************************************************************
          > >
          > > THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY WARNS OF BUSH'S ANTI-ENVIRONMENT MOVES
          > >
          > > The very old (founded in 1935), large, and U.S. conservative
          conservation
          > organization, The Wilderness Society, has issued an unusual warning and
          > action alert about the anti-environmental movements of the George W. Bush
          > administration. The Wilderness Society stated that it, "found that, on
          > issue after issue, the president and his appointees have failed to
          safeguard
          > our air, water, land, and wildlife, siding instead with those interests
          > eager to make a quick profit. We've concluded that informed and aroused
          > activists like you, along with a vigilant Congress, are essential to blunt
          > the administration's anti-environmental actions." It stated that, "while
          our
          > country wisely focuses on countering terrorism, the Bush administration
          > continues to move at full speed to implement its anti-environmental
          > agenda -- mostly under the radar. Since September 11, Interior Secretary
          > Gale Norton and others have invoked "national security" to justify massive
          > oil development not only in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but also
          on
          > fragile western public lands across the lower 48 states. But homeland
          > security includes wildland protection. The clean air and water, biological
          > diversity, and inspiration that our national parks, wilderness, and other
          > natural reserves provide are of vital importance." It stated that, "the
          > truly patriotic course of action is not to plunder the most stunning lands
          > we have inherited, but to protect them. Each generation serves as trustee
          of
          > these natural treasures, and this administration is breaching that trust."
          > >
          > > The Wilderness Society warned that, "the White House is championing an
          > energy plan that is a half-century out of date and appears to draw more on
          > the advice of Enron and other fossil-fuel industry executives than on
          anyone
          > else's. Under this blueprint, our environment would be sacrificed in a
          host
          > of ways. The new administration has ignored or misstated findings of the
          > scientific community. Scientists extol the value of roadless forests, but
          > the Bush administration is trying to undermine the policy that would
          protect
          > 58.5 million acres of roadless national forest lands. Interior Secretary
          > Norton gave inaccurate testimony to Congress on Arctic caribou calving
          > facts, claiming later that it was a typo. She told the U.S. Army Corps of
          > Engineers that she supported its wetlands proposals -- but failed to pass
          > along criticism from biologists at the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service."
          > >
          > > Many, many appointees to key positions in the Administration are former
          > lobbyists or employees of powerful timber, oil and gas, coal mining, and
          > energy companies. They include: Mark Rey, Steven Griles, James
          Connaughton,
          > James Cason, William Myers, Paul Hoffman, Drue Pierce, Rebecca Watson,
          > Bennet Raley, and Camden Toohey. Read their bios on-line at >
          > <http://www.wilderness.org/newsroom/rls012402.htm> . You can download the
          > full report from <http://www.wilderness.org/newsroom/rls012402.htm> .
          > >
          > >
          *************************************************************************
          > >
          > > PESTICIDES INCREASE CANCER IN FARM WORKERS - UFW
          > >
          > > A new study by the United Farm Workers (UFW) in California found
          increased
          > cancer rates in those Hispanics that worked in the farm fields than in
          those
          > Hispanics that did not. The study, entitled, "Cancer Incidences in the
          > United Farm Workers of America, 1987-1997," was published in the December
          > 2001 issue of the American Journal of Industrial Medicine. The study
          linked
          > the UFW medical and pension plan records with the database of the
          California
          > Cancer Registry. It found that the risk of major forms of cancer such as
          > breast, lung, and prostate cancer were higher in those who worked in farm
          > operations. The study was headed by Dr. Paul Mills, an epidemiologist of
          the
          > California Cancer Registry. UFW workers had a 59 percent higher risk for
          > leukemia, and a 69 percent higher risk for stomach cancer than the general
          > Latino population in California. Uterine cancers in females were also
          > elevated in farm workers, as was brain cancer for both males and females,
          > the report showed. "The study validates the many other studies that have
          > been done over the years that there is a correlation between pesticides
          and
          > the health of farm workers," said Douglas Blaylock, Administrator of the
          > UFW's Medical Plan. Large farm operations use many types of pesticides and
          > chemicals including those that kill bugs, prevent weed growth, control the
          > dropping or ripening of fruit, etc. Any one of these chemicals, or a
          > combination of them over a long period of time may increase the likelihood
          > of cancer and other chemical-induced diseases in humans. Source, "UFW
          Study
          > Shows Farm Workers Have Higher Risk of Getting Cancer," by Olivia Reyes
          > Garcia, The Bakersfield Californian, February 4, 2002.
          > >
          > > ************************************************************************
          > >
          > > MEXICO DANGEROUS TO DO BUSINESS IN
          > >
          > > A new wire story out of Mexico City by Associated Press reveals that
          > Mexico is becoming a dangerous place in which to do business. Mexico is
          > catching up with Colombia as the business-man kidnapping capital of the
          > world. More and more business executives, both Mexican and foreign are
          being
          > kidnapped for small and large ransoms. Many of the crimes are committed
          with
          > the complicity of the Mexican police. Many of the judges are paid-off to
          > give no or light sentences to kidnappers. This information is miportant
          for
          > the environment companies that may wish to do business in Mexico. There
          are
          > risks. AP reports a raising number of kidnappings in 2001, reporting that
          it
          > escalated in 1996 with the kidnapping of Mamoru Konno, a top executive of
          > Sanyo Video Components USA. "His company paid a US$2 million for his
          release
          > 8 days after his capture. In 1997, the year was highlighted by the
          > kidnapping of New York native Vincent Carrozza, a hotel manager in
          Acapulco.
          > He was kidnapped by 10 heavily armed emn and held for eight days when his
          > family finally paid a ransom. AP reported that Jose Antonio Ortega, a
          public
          > safety adviser for the Mexican Employers Confederation stated, "that there
          > is great concern on the part of foreigners about what is happening." AP
          > reported that, "experts say that most kidnappings are conducted by loosely
          > organized gangs, drug traffickers looking for alternate business ventures,
          > common criminals and even middle-class professionals who see kidnapping as
          a
          > way to make a quick buck overnight." AP reports that Mexico's President,
          > Vicente Fox, is attempting to take action to reduce kidnapping and other
          > crimes in Mexico. For example, "he has replaced the federal judicial
          police,
          > the most corrupt of all Mexico's police forces, with a national police
          force
          > similar to the FBI." Source, "Kidnapping is King of Mexican Crimes:
          Rampant
          > Police Corruption Worsens Problem as Criminals Target rich, Poor, by Lisa
          J.
          > Adams, The Associated Press, February 3, 2002. >
          > >
          > > ************************************************************************
          > >
          > > NEW PROPOSED WTO ITEMS MAY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL HARM TO THE ENVIRONMENT
          > >
          > > The World Trade Organization (WTO) Doha Ministerial meeting in November
          > 2001 identified new discussion issues that could result in new threats to
          > the environment. In the overtime hours of the meeting, the trade ministers
          > of 142 countries stitched together a Ministerial Declaration that allowed
          > the following. (1) prepare new language similar to NAFTA's Chapter 11,
          that
          > allows companies to sue governments that try to stop trade harmful to the
          > environment. These investor-to-state lawsuits provide corporations with
          > rights far above those of citizens or domestic investors. (2) initiating
          > negotiations on the elimination of tariffs and non-tariff measures (NTMs,
          > commonly known as laws and regulations) that revive the possibility of
          > increased exploitation of critical forest areas and promotes the
          elimination
          > of the availability of public policy tools to protect forests. This
          "Global
          > Free Logging Agreement" was a significant issue at the 1999 Seattle
          > Ministerial, and poses a threat to ancient forests in Indonesia, Malaysia,
          > and Chile. Further, strategies for environmental conservation, such as
          > eco-labeling, certification, and bans on raw log exports, could come under
          > fire in these market access negotiations. (3) Ironically woven into a
          > section on the environment is the elimination of tariff and non-tariff
          > measures for such industries as hazardous waste landfills, incinerators,
          and
          > water services (since they are considered to be "environmental services").
          > The liberalization of these industries could prevent governments from
          > placing limits on the number of facilities permitted to operate in a given
          > area. (4) the WTO will begin to generate new trade competition rules that
          > may adopt language that would be used to challenge environmental laws and
          > regulations if they are deemed to be barriers to competition. For more
          > information contact Jason Tockman, Director, International Trade Program,
          > American Lands Alliance, PO Box 555, Athens, Ohio 45701, ph.
          > > (740) 594-5441.
          > >
          > >
          **************************************************************************
          > >
          > > BRUSSELS GROUP OF NATIONS TRIED TO LIMIT IMPACT OF 1972 STOCKHOLM
          > ENVIRONMENT CONFERENCE
          > >
          > > The United Nations Conference on the Environment held in Stockholm,
          > Sweden, in 1972, was the first in a series of great world conferences on
          the
          > environment. It was followed by UN world conferences on population, food,
          > habitat, energy, etc. The 1972 Stockholm Environment Conference was the
          > first, created by a swell of public outrage at the unremitant pollution of
          > the environment, with no controls, by forest, mining, oil and chemical
          > industries. Citizens were calling for unprecedented government action and
          > laws to control the polluters. We celebrate Stockholm every ten years by
          > holding special international conferences. The last was in Rio in 1992.
          The
          > next is in South Africa this year to celebrate 30 years after Stockholm
          and
          > to monitor international progress towards cleaning up the environment. The
          > United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) based in Nairobi, Kenya, was
          > created as a result of the Stockholm Conference.
          > >
          > > That's why it has come as a stunning revelation that many of the OECD
          > nations including the United States, the U.K., Italy, Belgium, the
          > Netherlands, France and Germany, formed the "Brussels Group" to try to
          limit
          > the effectiveness of the decisions and actions that would be taken in
          > Stockholm in 1972. The existence of this cabal, known as the Brussels
          group,
          > was revealed in 30-year-old British government records that were kept
          secret
          > until December 2001. > The group was "an unofficial policy-making body to
          > concert the views of the principal governments concerned", according to a
          > note of one of the group's first meetings written by a civil servant in
          the
          > British Foreign and Commonwealth Office. "It will have to remain informal
          > and confidential." This meeting took p> lace in July 1971, nearly a year
          > before the Stockholm conference opened. The group was concerned that
          > environmental regulations would restrict trade. It wanted to stop UNEP
          from
          > being an effective world body and limit its annual budget so that it
          > couldn't function as properly as other UN agencies such as UNICEF and FAO.
          > British Foreign Office papers say the group "made real progress on this
          > difficult problem", though without specifying how this was done. The notes
          > record that Canada's Maurice Strong, Chairman of the UN Stockholm
          > Environment Conference and Director General of the Rio "20" After
          Stockholm
          > Conference in Brazil, had already been grumbling about the group's
          negative
          > activities in 1971. "We may get some criticism from the Swedes and others
          > [and] we must be careful when expanding the group not to include awkward
          > bedfellows," the note adds. Another memo, written by an official in what
          was
          > then the U.K. Department of the Environment, it says that Britain wanted
          to
          > restrict the scope of the Stockholm conference and reduce the number of
          > proposals for action. In an indirect reference to what would later become
          > UNEP, the paper says a "new and expensive international organisation must
          be
          > avoided, but a small effective central coordinating mechanism ... would
          not
          > be welcome but is probably inevitable". For the full story see the website
          > <http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991734> .
          > >
          > > *******************************************************************
          > >
          > > RENEWABLE ENERGY GROWING FAST IN COUNTRIES THAT SUPPORT IT
          > >
          > > Why has wind energy grown faster in Germany than Britain, and energy
          from
          > solar panels expanded more quickly in Spain than Greece? A new report from
          > the European Environment Agency (EEA) identifies factors that can
          influence
          > the success or otherwise of renewable energy projects. Renewable energies:
          > success stories aims to facilitate greater use of renewable energy sources
          > and contribute to efforts by the European Union (EU) and its Member States
          > to meet targets for increasing power from renewables by 2010. This is part
          > of the EU efforts to meet the Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing
          greenhouse
          > gas emissions (GHG) from burning oil, coal, and natural gas for energy.
          The
          > report focuses on how much each EU country managed to expand its use
          between
          > 1993 and 1999 of a number of renewable energy technologies - solar
          > photovoltaic panels, solar thermal heating, wind and certain uses of
          biomass
          > (wood and crops). The study identifies essential elements for success in
          > seven areas: political, legislative, fiscal, financial and administrative
          > support, technological development, and information, education and
          training.
          > It concludes that the key to success lies in the combined effect of
          support
          > measures rather than in any single factor. The winning combinations vary
          > from one technology to another. The success stories include the expansion
          of
          > solar thermal energy and biomass-fueled district heating in Austria, wind
          > energy and biomass power in Denmark, photovoltaics, solar thermal and wind
          > energy in Germany, photovoltaics and wind energy in Spain and biomass
          > district heating in Sweden, said EEA Executive Director Domingo Jiménez-
          > Beltrán. The report was released at the European Parliament in Brussels at
          a
          > meeting of the European Forum for Renewable Energy Sources (EUROFORES) and
          > the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC). The study and the executive
          > summary can be downloaded from the EEA website at
          > <">http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_issue_report_2001_27/en/>
          > <http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_issue_report_2001_27/en/>.
          > >
          > > *********************************************************************
          > >
          > > EUROPEAN UNION SET RENEWABLE ENERGY TARGET OF 12% OF TOTAL ENERGY
          > PRODUCTION
          > >
          > > > The EU has set itself an indicative target of producing 12% of its
          > energy (both electricity and heat) and 22.1% of its electricity from
          > renewable sources by 2010. Indicative national renewable electricity
          targets
          > for each Member State are also included in the recently adopted EU>
          > renewable electricity Directive (2001/77/EC). For more information contact
          > Tony Carritt, Media Relations Manager/Responsable des relations avec les
          > médias, European Environment Agency/Agence européenne pour l'environnement
          ,
          > Kongens Nytorv 6, 1050 Copenhagen K, Denmark, Tel (direct): +45 3336 7147,
          > Mobile: +45 2368 3669, Fax: +45 3336 7198. Visit the EEA's press room at
          > <http://org.eea.eu.int/PR> .
          > >
          > >
          >
          ****************************************************************************
          > >
          > > SEATTLE CITY LIGHT IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMITS TO 50-MW WIND
          POWER
          > PURCHASE
          > >
          > > Seattle City Council members unanimously approved Mayor Paul Schell's
          > proposal to become the largest municipal utility purchaser of wind power
          in
          > the nation. The city will begin buying 50 MW of capacity from PacifiCorp
          > Power Marketing (PPM)--about 5% of the utility's load--from the Stateline
          > Wind Farm beginning January 1, 2002. The purchase is set to increase to
          100
          > MW in August, 2002, and possibly to 175 MW by August, 2004. "This is a
          great
          > opportunity for our utility," said City Council member Heidi Wills, chair
          of
          > the Council's Energy and Environmental Policy Committee. "Wind power
          > diversifies our energy portfolio and gives us another clean, efficient
          > renewable resource to complement our hydroelectric power." The price for
          the
          > energy generated in January, including delivery costs, will be less than 5
          > cents per kWh and is comparable to costs for electricity generated by
          > natural-gas-powered turbines. They also demonstrate that wind is clearly
          > competitive, provide strong incentives to leverage future wind resource
          > development, and inform regional discussions as to the costs of turning
          the
          > intermittent wind resource into a firm, more practicably usable product."
          > >
          > >
          **************************************************************************
          > >
          > > CHEVRON/TEXACO TO INVEST IN SOLAR ENERGY EXPANSION
          > >
          > > The energy services subsidiary of the ChevronTexaco oil company, Chevron
          > Energy Solutions LP, is collaborating with its manufacturing affiliate,
          > Energy Conversion Devices Inc, to broaden the commercial application of
          > flexible solar electric roofing materials and nickel-metal hydride (NiMH)
          > batteries, as well as hydrogen storage systems and fuel cells. The full
          > story can be read at:
          > <http://www.solaraccess.com/news/story.jsp?storyid=1313> .
          > >
          > >
          **************************************************************************
          > >
          > > THREE NEW SKYSCRAPERS IN LONDON, U.K. WILL BE BUILT TO BE
          ENVIRONMENTALLY
          > SOUND
          > >
          > > UK developer St. George recently unveiled plans for a 49-story building
          > that would be Britain's tallest residential high-rise and "greenest"
          > skyscraper. If approved, the triple-glazed, mainly glass structure will be
          > topped by a 30-foot tall wind generator to provide enough power for the
          > building's communal lights, and will use heat exchangers drawing on the
          > water table to reduce the need for air conditioning and central heating.
          The
          > building, say architects Broadway Malyan, will use just a third of the
          > energy of a comparable building, reduce carbon emissions by up to 66
          percent
          > and include features like gardens and windows that open. Two other planned
          > high-rises billed as ecologically sensitive are a 30-story "bioclimatic
          > skyscraper" expected to be built next year in south London, by Malaysian
          > architect Ken Yeang, and Norman Foster's 41-story "erotic gherkin" planned
          > for the City. Most of Yeang's buildings have been in the tropics; he will
          > have a different set of problems in south London, but we can expect a
          > building with natural ventilation, natural lighting, and rain and
          wastewater
          > collection systems. From The Guardian (London), 12 Dec 2001 and 14 Dec
          2001,
          > by John Vidal. Source Chris Hammer, Copyright 2001 Sustainable Design
          > Resources.
          > >
          > >
          *************************************************************************>
          > >
          > > VISIT THE USGS WEBSITE ON CHEMICAL CONCENTRATIONS IN U.S. SURFACE WATER
          > >
          > > The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has new online web maps of
          > chemical concentrations in surface water in the United States. This will
          > give you chance to learn where polluters are dumping and take corrective
          > action. The url is long. If it doesn't work for you just go to the link
          at
          > <http://www.mapcruzin.com/> . Here is how to get there directly:
          > <http://orxddwimdn.er.usgs.gov/servlet/page?_pageid=543&_dad=por>
          > > tal30&_schema=PORTAL30
          > >
          > > ************************************************************************
          > >
          > > RECKLESS COMMERCIAL FISHING PRACTICES NEED TO BE AMENDED
          > >
          > > For centuries who cared? Commercial fishermen could kill and discard
          fish,
          > seals and whales at will. They could drop damaged fish net overboard and
          let
          > them kill the fish and marine mammals for years later. There were just too
          > many fish. They could never be depleted. Now that we know that the bounty
          of
          > fish could be sustained under increasing human pressure is a myth, we must
          > change our laws and change ways in order to protect the remaining depleted
          > world fishery. Fishing gear that goes on killing long after it has been
          > discarded is the scourge of the Pacific Ocean, particularly near the
          > Northwestern Hawaiian Islands where the nets threatens already endangered
          > Hawaiian monk seals, turtles, and sea birds. The good news is that more
          than
          > 60 tons of discarded fishing nets and derelict fishing gear have now been
          > recovered from the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands by teams of expert
          divers.
          > The bad news is that there are still more than 100 tons of the stuff out
          > there entangling and killing local fish and marine creatures. As a whole,
          > the unpopulated Northwestern Hawaiian Islands are quite free of human
          > influence. But the pattern of Pacific Ocean currents pushes massive
          amounts
          > of derelict fishing nets and gear onto the widely separated islands. Monk
          > seals, especially curious pups, get entangled in the nets and often drown.
          > With U.S. $3 million allocated for ocean debris removal, the United States
          > National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) deployed three
          > chartered commercial vessels in September 2001 for a 90-day clean-up tour.
          > NOAA joined forces with the Ocean Conservancy, U.S. Coast Guard, Hawaii
          Sea
          > Grant, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other state and private
          > organizations to clean up the waters around the Hawaiian archipelago. It
          is
          > time to regulate the casual ocean disposal of commercial fishing gear.
          > Source, Environmental News Network (ENN), December 5, 2001. See the full
          > story at
          <http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/12/12052001/s_45791.asp>
          > >
          > >
          >
          ***************************************************************************
          > >
          > > KNOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITIES IN THE COMPANIES YOU INVEST IN
          > >
          > > The United States Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) requires
          companies
          > lists on the New York Stock Exchange and other U.S. stock exchanges to
          > report their environmental liabilities to potential investors. A 1998
          > Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) study found that 74 percent of
          > publicly-traded companies had failed to adequately disclose the existence
          of
          > environmental legal proceedings in their 10-K registration requirements as
          > mandated by the Securities Exchange Commission. In October 2001, the EPA
          > launched a campaign for corporate environmental accounting under US SEC
          > Regulation S-K. For more information visit the websites
          > <http://www.pollutiononline.com/read/nl20010515/427844>, and
          > > <http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/sec.pdf> . And now Senator Jefford's has
          > proposed a draft bill to have corporations file the financial impact of
          > their greenhouse gas emission performance on their quarterly and annual
          SEC
          > 10-Q & 10-K filings under SEC Regulation S-K.
          > >
          > > References:
          > > Notice on Public Company Requirements to Disclose Environmental Legal
          > Proceedings>
          > > <http://es.epa.gov/oeca/main/strategy/oppac_notice.html>
          > >
          > > Also see the October 1, 2001 US EPA alert on SEC disclosure at the
          website
          > <http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/sec.pdf>
          > >
          > > See the World Resources Institute report on financial environmental
          > departures by US publicly traded pulp manufacturers
          > <http://www.wristore.com/pureprofit.html>
          > >
          > > Publicly traded corporations disclosing financial environmental
          > liabilities must have corporate reserves to cover those liabilities under
          > SEC regulations. <http://www.law.uc.edu/CCL/regS-K/index.html> . Source,
          > Donald Sutherland at email donaldsutherland-iso14000@...
          > <mailto:donaldsutherland-iso14000@...> , or phone him at
          (508)
          > 497-3676. For more information contact Shiria Venus, Office of Policy
          > Analysis and Communication, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
          > Washington, D.C., ph. (202) 564-0177.
          > >
          > > *********************************************************************
          > >
          > > NEW YORK SUES TWO POWER COMPANIES OVER THEIR AIR POLLUTION
          > >
          > > New York state filed a federal lawsuit against Niagara Mohawk Holdings,
          > Inc. and NRG Energy, Inc. alleging violations of the Clean Air Act at two
          > coal-burning power plants in western New York. The suit alleges that the
          > Dunkirk and C.R. Huntley coal-burning plants, located in Chautauqua and
          Erie
          > counties, respectively, account for a disproportionate amount of nitrogen
          > oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions released by all power plants in the
          > state, big factors in both acid rain and smog. The public rightfully
          expects
          > that the Clean Air Act will be vigorously enforced," N.Y. Attorney General
          > Eliot Spitzer said in a statement. "We will make sure that power companies
          > fully comply with the law and compensate the state for the harm caused by
          > acid rain and smog." The state charges that the firms made modifications
          at
          > the power plants without upgrading air pollution controls on the
          > smokestacks, as required by law. The two plants were owned and operated by
          > Niagara Mohawk, the owner of New York State's second largest utility,
          until
          > 1999, when they were sold to NRG. Last July, Niagara Mohawk sued NRG
          > claiming the latter is responsible for the cost of bringing the plants
          into
          > compliance with the Clean Air Act. Source, Reuters News Service, Planet
          Ark.
          > See the full story at
          > <http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/14003/story.htm> .
          > >
          > >
          *************************************************************************
          > >
          > > ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOUNTING LECTURE GIVEN AT HARVARD
          > >
          > > One of the world's top figures in environmental accounting gave a
          lecture
          > at the Harvard School of Public Health, September 11, 2001. Dr. Markus
          > Stobel, (Institute for Management and the World, University of Augsburg,
          > Germany) presented a seminar entitled "Material Flow Oriented Cost
          > Accounting: A Tool for Cost Saving Recognition and Environmental
          > Protection." This is methodology that has been extensively tested in
          > Germany and Japan as a means for companies to seek competitive advantage
          in
          > Eco-Efficient Management. This technique should also work well in
          > university programs aimed at greening of the campus since it addresses the
          > financial impacts of these programs. For more information about the
          lecture
          > contact Dr. Robert Pojasek, Adjunct Faculty Lecturer, Harvard School of
          > Public Health, P.O. Box 1333, East. Arlington, Massachusetts 02474-0071,
          ph.
          > (781) 641-2422, fax (781) 465-6006, email rpojasek@...
          > <mailto:rpojasek@...> . Visit their website at
          > <http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/facres/pojasek.html> .
          > >
          > >
          > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
          > >
          > Copyright (c) 2002
          > > Canadian Institute
          for
          > Business and the >
          > > Environment,
          > Montreal & Toronto
          > >
          All
          > rights reserved.
          > >
          > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
          > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          > > ADVERTISEMENT
          > >
          >
          <http://rd.yahoo.com/M=221000.1882886.3382503.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050641
          >
          77:HM/A=965713/R=0/O=1/I=brandr-promo-flowersale-alerts-lrecg/*http://shoppi
          > ng.yahoo.com/promotions/flowers/index.html>
          > >
          >
          <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=221000.1882886.3382503.1261774/D=egroupmai
          > l/S=1705064177:HM/A=965713/rand=990145074>
          > >
          > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
          > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
          >
        • Andrew McCalla
          Joseph, Points well taken. However, I must take issue with your statement: Without a deregulated power grid, green power wouldn t even be available. Aside
          Message 4 of 9 , Feb 11, 2002
            Joseph,

            Points well taken.

            However, I must take issue with your statement:  "Without a deregulated power grid, green power wouldn't even be available."

            Aside from those putting in their own systems, it has been available for many for some time, and from utilities even, just not yours.


            Andrew H. McCalla
            Meridian Energy Systems, Inc.
            Solar-Electric System Design, Installation, and Service.
            P.O. Box 5810
            Austin, TX  78763
            Tel: 512-477-3050
            Fax: 512-477-3035
          • Joseph Phelan
            ...and most of them live in Phoenix where it s sunny all day, or in West Texas, where it s windy. It is my opinion that you need a connected, deregulated grid
            Message 5 of 9 , Feb 11, 2002
              ...and most of them live in Phoenix where it's sunny all day, or in West Texas, where it's windy.  It is my opinion that you need a connected, deregulated grid so everyone can play via financial settlements esp in regions not so blessed.
              Enron is not "my" utility.  I am unemployed.
              There is no love lost for Enron on my part, trust me.
               
              You guys hiring?
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 2:52 PM
              Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the Environment

              Joseph,

              Points well taken.

              However, I must take issue with your statement:  "Without a deregulated power grid, green power wouldn't even be available."

              Aside from those putting in their own systems, it has been available for many for some time, and from utilities even, just not yours.


              Andrew H. McCalla
              Meridian Energy Systems, Inc.
              Solar-Electric System Design, Installation, and Service.
              P.O. Box 5810
              Austin, TX  78763
              Tel: 512-477-3050
              Fax: 512-477-3035


              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
            • Andrew McCalla
              Joseph, Not having done any recent demographic studies on residential renewable energy system installations, by kW rating or quantity, I m not sure where
              Message 6 of 9 , Feb 11, 2002
                Joseph,

                Not having done any recent demographic studies on residential renewable energy system installations, by kW rating or quantity, I'm not sure where "most" of "them" live, but I doubt you would be right in assuming that "most of them live in Phoenix where it's sunny all day, or in West Texas, where it's windy."   By the way, who is your utility provider?  Are they offering green power and are you taking advantage of it?

                However, I do agree with your opinion that we need a connected, deregulated grid.  Preferably, one day, one so advanced as that which Buckminster Fuller envisioned:

                http://www.geni.org/energy/issues/overview/english/grid.html

                Actually, we are hiring.  If you can hold your own with system design and installation, and are fairly handy at chopping wood and carrying water, please give me a call.

                Andrew


                Andrew H. McCalla
                Meridian Energy Systems, Inc.
                Solar-Electric System Design, Installation, and Service.
                P.O. Box 5810
                Austin, TX  78763
                Tel: 512-477-3050
                Fax: 512-477-3035
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.