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

Link to Conservation Policies

Expand Messages
  • Jonathan Clemens
    HREG, I am providing the following link to the Sierra Club conservation policies, in particular, those relating to energy. The policies are quited dated
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 5, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      HREG,

      I am providing the following link to the Sierra Club conservation policies,
      in particular, those relating to energy. The policies are quited dated
      (old), but do give some insight into what we, as a volunteer group in an
      energy hungry world, have to think about and do. This information is FYI
      and not provided for Sierra Club campaigning or endorsement (though you all
      know I am a member). So you know, the Sierra Club is a non-profit
      conservation organization formed in 1892 and works for grass-roots oriented
      cooperation, with organizations and government at large, toward
      environmental preservation and justice.

      Side note: The Sierra Club at times supports the construction of new fossil
      fueled electric plants, but only to replace dirtier or environmentally
      unfriendly plants. The club actively monitors and participates in the
      discussions about global warming and what to do about it.

      Jonathan
      >
      > http://www.sierraclub.org/policy/conservation/index.asp
      >
      >
      > I'm the first person to concede that Club policy is dated and not
      > particularly helpful in the energy area. I've been working for years to
      > change that, and I'm guardedly optimistic that we can increase the rate
      > of new material officially recognized by the Club this year. We are
      > working at present to promote a strategy that relies primarily on energy
      > efficiency. This would include energy efficient generation of
      > electricity. Even so, CO2 is not presently regulated, and our
      > perspective on electric generation must be taken in context.
      >
      > I've been working on electric issues for most of two decades, and I have
      > a high level of confidence that there isn't enough natural gas or
      > renewable potential in 2001 to matter in a global warming scenario. But
      > while the Sierra Club cares about global warming, there are a lot of
      > people in California right now who are upset and energized to do
      > something, and most of them don't give a fig about climate change, even
      > if the shortfall of rain at the root of their problems results from
      > climate trends affected by greenhouse gasses. I imagine Reuters is
      > taking liberties with some things Rich Ferguson has been saying to the
      > press. Environmentalists are being blamed for the problems there, and
      > it is helpful for us to be able to point to our support of specific
      > projects that were killed by FERC, which would have alleviated the
      > current crunch.
      >
      > Aside from global warming, there are a lot of people who have worked for
      > a long time on other emissions from power plants. We've made gains in
      > recent years by encouraging EPA to adopt emissions standards that are
      > not tailored to particular fuels, thereby making it possible to save
      > human lives by setting standards for ozone precursors that engage some
      > of the important potential of cleaner fuels. The strongest argument for
      > increased acid rain reductions is the simple fact that we cut 50% of
      > U.S. emissions for one tenth of the cost that industry projected, and
      > one fifth of the cost that U.S. EPA expected. Promoting the
      > construction of new power plants according to strict environmental rules
      > is an important strategy when opposing the construction of the plant at
      > all has proven ineffective.
      >
      > We have to find ways to create positive change in a political
      > environment that involves a whole lot of people who would rather support
      > Bush for President than have their basic facts straight. We have to
      > deal with major news media who deliberately skew the simple statements
      > we make, and ignore the prudence of some seemingly basic questions like
      > for example, how much will ANWR oil cost, or what does it have to do
      > with California's electric supply?
      >
      > Please feel free to hold us accountable for what we say, but not for
      > what others say about us.
      >
      > - Ned
      >
      >
      > David Orr wrote:
      > >
      > > ---------------------- Information from the mail
      header -----------------------
      > > Sender: Energy Forum <CONS-SPST-ENERGY-FORUM@...>
      > > Poster: David Orr <DavidOrr@...>
      > > Subject: Reuters: California green groups split over power policy,
      > > 20010201
      >
      > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
      -----
      > >
      > > "The Sierra Club, however, has long supported construction and continues
      > > to do so as long as the plants are built under strict environmental
      > > guidelines."
      > >
      > > Is the above statement true, and if so, can we have some discussion on
      > > this?
      > >
      > > _________________________________________
      >
      > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
      > For SC email list T-and-C, send: GET TERMS-AND-CONDITIONS.CURRENT
      > to listserv@...
      > For help in managing your subscription, or questions/comments about the
      Energy
      > Forum, contact Ned.Ford@...
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.