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

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

Expand Messages
  • Joseph Phelan
    OK Polly here goes I feel better that it s at your request It will likely stir things up a bit, but so be it. Regards, Joe ... From: Polly Ledvina
    Message 1 of 2 , Feb 11, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      OK Polly
      here goes
      I feel better that it's at your request
      It will likely stir things up a bit, but so be it.

      Regards,
      Joe

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Polly Ledvina" <pledvina@...>
      To: "Joseph Phelan" <jphelan1@...>
      Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 9:38 AM
      Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
      Environment


      > Joseph,
      >
      > Thanks very much. Because I'm not very knowledgeable in how the energy
      > market works, or the fine points of the technologies, I am susceptible to
      > "hype." Gallon's one side of the issue sounded credible. The good thing
      > that came from posting it is that it provided an opportunity to learn the
      > other side of the issue - if only those more knowledgeable had posted an
      > intelligent rebuttal instead of just getting angry. I think you should
      > post your answer to me for everyone to read. It would be a service and
      > it's a much better way to combat "hype" than anger.
      >
      > Polly
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "Joseph Phelan" <jphelan1@...>
      > To: <pledvina@...>
      > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 9:09 AM
      > Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
      > Environment
      >
      >
      > > Hey Polly:
      > >
      > > I used to work for Enron from 1997 until the bankruptcy.
      > >
      > > Enron did not own any oil interests except a small exploration group,
      > legacy
      > > from circa 1985 that was responsible for less than 1% of revenues.
      > > Enron was primarily a natural gas and electricity trader. They
      pioneered
      > > the creation of tradable derivatives (forward contracts) in natural gas
      > and
      > > power and were the prominent catalyts in the deregulation of the US
      > > electricity grid. They also worked extensively with General Electric
      and
      > > others to refine CCGT (combined cycle gas turbine) technology and get
      such
      > > plants installed nationwide since they were able to cover peak load
      spikes
      > > quicker and don't have the long start up time of large lumbering coal
      and
      > > nuclear plants. The net result of these efforts was a huge reduction in
      > > pollution because CCGT's are the most efficient power plants, also a
      > > load-levelled, interconnected grid allows for only the most efficient
      > plants
      > > to compete, so many old legacy coal plants were completely shut down.
      > > Networking the natural gas pipelines into a grid allowed for the
      > > proliferation of gas fired heat and gas fired power generation. Before
      > > then, natural gas was primarily an energy source for industrial
      customers
      > > only who had cut a deal to have their own pipeline built. Compare the
      > > products of combustion from natural gas vs fuel oil or coal and you'll
      > > understand what this has meant from an environmental perspective...very
      > > positive.
      > >
      > > Additionally, an interconnected, deregulated grid has allowed for the
      > > creation of "green power" offsets whereby a customer can source wind
      power
      > > from someone like Green Mountain Energy rather than be completely
      > dependent
      > > on whatever the local, regulated utility chose to sell them.
      > >
      > > Additionally, after bankrolling the Bush campaign, Enron's biggest
      request
      > > was that Bush RATIFY THE KYOTO TREATY and support tradable offset
      credits
      > in
      > > carbon dioxide. The result of this would have been far reaching from an
      > > envrionemtnal standpoint. I won't waste email space. Just check out
      > > Environmental Financial Products in Chicago (http://www.envifi.com/) to
      > get
      > > a read on what these credits are. Bush reneged on this campaign promise
      > and
      > > chose to side with big oil interests instead...as stated earlier, Enron
      > was
      > > not an oil company.
      > >
      > > Other tradable offsets already exist in NOx (nitrogen oxides) and SOx
      > > (oxides of sulfur). Enron was the largest trader of these emission
      > offsets
      > > and created liquidity in this market. I hope these markets can survive
      in
      > > Enron's absence.
      > >
      > > I worked for 4 years with the retail energy group at Enron called EES
      > (Enron
      > > Energy Services). The group used to outsource the energy
      infrastructures
      > of
      > > large clients, then invest its own money to make the systems MORE
      > EFFICIENT.
      > > At its peak, EES was managing $4 billion per year in energy bills and
      was
      > > creating energy savings of at least $50 to $100 million per year. It
      had
      > > invested over $200 million in energy efficient systems nationwide. This
      > did
      > > not make the news. I have spoken to no less than 8 media people since
      the
      > > bankruptcy...not one of them would print anything about this and always
      > > edited my commentary to delete it.
      > >
      > > No, we were not the Sierra Club....but the best thing you could ever do
      > for
      > > energy efficiency is to make it profitable. According to to Sun Tzu "
      To
      > > subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence".
      Convincing
      > > big business to make money from environmentally sustainable initiatives
      is
      > > far superior than confronting them head on in a political battle.
      > > (http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/thigpen/html/art_of_war.html#Estimates).
      > > Check out the Rocky Mountain Institute for more : (http://www.rmi.org).
      > >
      > >
      > > Such is the real cost of this Enron accounting scandal - many fine
      > employees
      > > and many great environmentally positive transactions now must be unwound
      > and
      > > shut down. This never was a political scandal except in the minds of
      > > self-serving politicians. Don't believe the hype.
      > >
      > > Peace,
      > >
      > > Joe
      > >
      > > ----- 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/
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • David Bergeron
      thank you joe! quality information from someone who knows. we need more of this and less political hype! ... From: Joseph Phelan
      Message 2 of 2 , Feb 11, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        thank you joe! 
         
        quality information from someone who knows. 
         
        we need more of this and less political hype!
         
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Joseph Phelan [mailto:jphelan1@...]
        Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:24 AM
        To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Fw: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the Environment

        OK Polly
        here goes
        I feel better that it's at your request
        It will likely stir things up a bit, but so be it.

        Regards,
        Joe

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Polly Ledvina" <pledvina@...>
        To: "Joseph Phelan" <jphelan1@...>
        Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 9:38 AM
        Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and the
        Environment


        > Joseph,
        >
        > Thanks very
        much.   Because I'm not very knowledgeable in how the energy
        >
        market works, or the fine points of the technologies, I am susceptible to
        > "hype."   Gallon's one side of the issue sounded
        credible.  The good thing
        > that came from posting it is that it
        provided an opportunity to learn the
        > other side of the issue - if only
        those more knowledgeable had posted an
        > intelligent rebuttal instead of
        just getting angry.   I think you should
        > post your answer to
        me for everyone to read.   It would be a service and
        > it's a
        much better way to combat  "hype" than anger.
        >
        >
        Polly
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Joseph Phelan"
        <jphelan1@...>
        > To:
        <pledvina@...>
        > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 9:09
        AM
        > Subject: Re: [hreg] Fw: Enron's Impact on Renewable Energy and
        the
        > Environment
        >
        >
        > > Hey Polly:
        > >
        > > I used to work for Enron from 1997 until the
        bankruptcy.
        > >
        > > Enron did not own any oil interests except
        a small exploration group,
        > legacy
        > > from circa 1985 that was
        responsible for less than 1% of revenues.
        > > Enron was primarily a
        natural gas and electricity trader.  They
        pioneered
        > > the
        creation of tradable derivatives (forward contracts) in natural gas
        >
        and
        > > power and were the prominent catalyts in the deregulation of
        the US
        > > electricity grid.  They also worked extensively with
        General Electric
        and
        > > others to refine CCGT (combined cycle gas
        turbine) technology and get
        such
        > > plants installed nationwide
        since they were able to cover peak load
        spikes
        > > quicker and don't
        have the long start up time of large lumbering coal
        and
        > > nuclear
        plants.  The net result of these efforts was a huge reduction in
        > > pollution because CCGT's are the most efficient power plants, also
        a
        > > load-levelled, interconnected grid allows for only the most
        efficient
        > plants
        > > to compete, so many old legacy coal plants
        were completely shut down.
        > > Networking the natural gas pipelines
        into a grid allowed for the
        > > proliferation of gas fired heat and gas
        fired power generation.  Before
        > > then, natural gas was
        primarily an energy source for industrial
        customers
        > > only who had
        cut a deal to have their own pipeline built.  Compare the
        > >
        products of combustion from natural gas vs fuel oil or coal and you'll
        > > understand what this has meant from an environmental
        perspective...very
        > > positive.
        > >
        > >
        Additionally, an interconnected, deregulated grid has allowed for the
        > > creation of "green power" offsets whereby a customer can source
        wind
        power
        > > from someone like Green Mountain Energy rather than
        be completely
        > dependent
        > > on whatever the local, regulated
        utility chose to sell them.
        > >
        > > Additionally, after
        bankrolling the Bush campaign, Enron's biggest
        request
        > > was that
        Bush RATIFY THE KYOTO TREATY and support tradable offset
        credits
        >
        in
        > > carbon dioxide.  The result of this would have been far
        reaching from an
        > > envrionemtnal standpoint. I won't waste email
        space.  Just check out
        > > Environmental Financial Products in
        Chicago (http://www.envifi.com/) to
        > get
        > > a read on what these credits are.  Bush reneged
        on this campaign promise
        > and
        > > chose to side with big oil
        interests instead...as stated earlier, Enron
        > was
        > > not an oil
        company.
        > >
        > > Other tradable offsets already exist in NOx
        (nitrogen oxides) and SOx
        > > (oxides of sulfur).  Enron was the
        largest trader of these emission
        > offsets
        > > and created
        liquidity in this market.  I hope these markets can survive
        in
        > > Enron's absence.
        > >
        > > I worked for 4 years with the
        retail energy group at Enron called EES
        > (Enron
        > > Energy
        Services).  The group used to outsource the energy
        infrastructures
        > of
        > > large clients, then invest its
        own money to make the systems MORE
        > EFFICIENT.
        > > At its peak,
        EES was managing $4 billion per year in energy bills and
        was
        > >
        creating energy savings of at least $50 to $100 million per year.  It
        had
        > > invested over $200 million in energy efficient systems
        nationwide.  This
        > did
        > > not make the news.  I have
        spoken to no less than 8 media people since
        the
        > > bankruptcy...not
        one of them would print anything about this and always
        > > edited my
        commentary to delete it.
        > >
        > > No, we were not the Sierra
        Club....but the best thing you could ever do
        > for
        > > energy
        efficiency is to make it profitable.  According to to Sun Tzu "
        To
        > > subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme
        excellence".
        Convincing
        > > big business to make money from
        environmentally sustainable initiatives
        is
        > > far superior than
        confronting them head on in a political battle.
        > >  (
        href="http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/thigpen/html/art_of_war.html#Estimates).">http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/thigpen/html/art_of_war.html#Estimates).
        > > Check out the Rocky Mountain Institute for more : (
        href="http://www.rmi.org).">http://www.rmi.org).
        > >
        > >
        > > Such is the real cost of this Enron accounting scandal - many
        fine
        > employees
        > > and many great environmentally positive
        transactions now must be unwound
        > and
        > > shut down.  This
        never was a political scandal except in the minds of
        > > self-serving
        politicians.  Don't believe the hype.
        > >
        > >
        Peace,
        > >
        > > Joe
        > >
        > > ----- 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 >
        > > > <
        href="http://www.wilderness.org/newsroom/rls012402.htm">http://www.wilderness.org/newsroom/rls012402.htm> . You can download
        > the
        > > > full report from <
        href="http://www.wilderness.org/newsroom/rls012402.htm">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
        > > > <
        href="http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991734">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
        > > > <">
        href="http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_issue_report_2001_27/en/">http://reports.eea.eu.int/environmental_issue_report_2001_27/en/>
        > > > <
        href="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
        > > > <
        href="http://org.eea.eu.int/PR">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:
        > > > <
        href="http://www.solaraccess.com/news/story.jsp?storyid=1313">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
        > > > <
        href="http://www.mapcruzin.com/">http://www.mapcruzin.com/> . Here is how to get there directly:
        > > > <
        href="http://orxddwimdn.er.usgs.gov/servlet/page?_pageid=543&_dad=por">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
        > > <
        href="http://www.enn.com/news/enn-stories/2001/12/12052001/s_45791.asp">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
        > > > <
        href="http://www.pollutiononline.com/read/nl20010515/427844">http://www.pollutiononline.com/read/nl20010515/427844>, and
        > > > > <
        href="http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/sec.pdf">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>
        > > > > <
        href="http://es.epa.gov/oeca/main/strategy/oppac_notice.html">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
        > > > <
        href="http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/sec.pdf">http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ore/sec.pdf>
        > > > >
        > > > > See the World Resources Institute report
        on financial environmental
        > > > departures by US publicly traded
        pulp manufacturers
        > > > <
        href="http://www.wristore.com/pureprofit.html">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
        > > > <
        href="http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/14003/story.htm">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
        > > > <
        href="http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/facres/pojasek.html">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
        > > > <
        href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        >
        href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject
        to
        >
        href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >



        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.