The environmental movement has lost its way, argues a Montana filmmaker, who is using Kickstart to raise funds for his film about the movement. J.D. King isn’t anti-environmentalist, but he is skeptical about where the movement is going.
For just 15 to 20 % of body weight, one can rest assure cipla levitra a decrease in bad cholesterol our your blood system. Some of the healthy health conditions include losing excess weight, reducing alcohol consumption, levitra without prescription and stopping smoking. Depending levitra without rx on how advanced the cancer is or how quickly it is spreading, your treatment options could range from simply monitoring the problem to undergoing aggressive radiation treatment. Muscle mass is typed using Equipoise preserved much better in this case there is no significant water retention cialis 100mg in the arms or legs. Other than what can be seen in the above pitch, I don’t know what the movie will be like, but I agree with the general premise. I worked in the movement for nearly 20 years, and during most of that time environmental groups were focused on saving the environment and willing to use any tools available to accomplish that goal. Today, most environmental groups seem more aimed at making government bigger, whether that is good for the environment or not. Perhaps some public exposure will help the movement open up to new ideas.
Ironically, the pitch above opens on my friend, Dave Foreman, giving a speech. Dave was always good at incendiary rhetoric in front of a large group, but at heart he is a libertarian who supported Barry Goldwater for president in 1964. It would be interesting to see what Foreman would say if King interviewed him for the movie.
The federal government……is the worst polluter in the United States. They’re the single largest consumer of energy with 500,000 buildings and 600,000 vehicles. In 2009 alone, the government’s bill for utilities and fuel totaled $24 billion. Despite never-ending plans, promises, and programs from every administration to get its polluting under control (remember the Environmental Protection Agency was started over 40 years ago in 1970– by a Republican). The Defense Department being the largest single contributor compared to all others combined. They produced more hazardous waste than the five largest US chemical companies combined and they’ve made some real potent stuff. Depleted uranium for armor piercing ammunition, petroleum, defoliant agents such as Agent Orange, and lead from the billions and billions of bullets fired over ranges all over the country. Along with vast amounts of radiation from weaponry produced, tested, and used. Between 1946 and 1958, the US dropped more than sixty nuclear weapons with effects on the people living near the Marshall Islands. Soviet as well as US made landmines and cluster munitions that litter Africa, Asia and Latin America. Made of brightly colored plastics that look like toys.
The Washington Post carried an item last week saying that the environmental movement played a “key role” in the 2012 national elections.
The environmental community scored a string of successes Tuesday in New Mexico, Montana, Texas and other states, winning seven of eight targeted Senate races and at least threetargeted House races. Although plenty of outside groups poured money into these contests, even some representatives of the fossil-fuel industry said that environmentalists had invested their resources wisely in 2012.
The Antiplanner wrote:
Today, most environmental groups seem more aimed at making government bigger, whether that is good for the environment or not. Perhaps some public exposure will help the movement open up to new ideas.
I have many problems with the environmental movement in the United States, including the following:
(1) A denial that air quality in the United States has gotten dramatically better since the enactment of the Clean Air Act in 1970. Much of the movement clings to claims that air quality is bad and getting worse, usually because of our decadent North American lifestyle.
(2) A seemingly endless infatuation with social engineering (in other words, Smart Growth especially for other people), often promoted by environmentalists and environmental groups that themselves live suburban or exurban lifestyles.
(3) Endless promotion of transportation projects that involve vehicles with steel wheels running on steel rails (the Sierra Club’s official transportation policy (here) states, among other things):
Walking and bicycling are best, along with electronic communications to reduce trips. Next are buses, minibuses, light rail and heavy rail (as corridor trips increase); electrified wherever feasible. Rail systems are most effective in stimulating compact development patterns, increasing public transit patronage and reducing motor vehicle use.
Environmentalists seem to assume that electric transit vehicles (especially those that run on steel rails) have zero impact on the environment. That is, of course, a false assumption, especially if the traction power comes from a coal-fired electric generating station, yet I have never heard a transit agency taken to task for not making sure that the traction power it consumes comes from solar, wind, hydro or nuclear generation (all of which have pretty close to zero carbon emissions).
CPZ, I don’t think either of these vague generalities are true:
Much of the movement clings to claims that air quality is bad and getting worse, usually because of our decadent North American lifestyle…Environmentalists seem to assume that electric transit vehicles (especially those that run on steel rails) have zero impact on the environment.
It is true AQ is still bad (as evidenced by several pervasive negative public health outcomes) and some measures show steady improvement, but I’m not sure there are more than three or four people on the planet that think electric transit vehicles have zero impact.
The main issue is carbon emissions, and IMHO much of the anti-movement wants to either conflate or mischaracterize the arguments in order to delay carbon reduction/curtailment or simply to continue to use the atmosphere as a free dump.
.02
DS