Stelmach: The Best Premier Oil Money Can Buy

Stelmach: The Best Premier Oil Money Can Buy

Dear friends,

Tonight, Greenpeace activists sent a clear message to Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach and his government that Alberta belongs to its residents and not the oil companies. Two Greenpeace activists disrupted Stelmach’s annual Edmonton Premier’s Dinner, descending from the ceiling of the Shaw Conference Centre and unveiling a banner that read: “$telmach: The Best Premier Oil Money Can Buy.”

Take action

Email Premier Stelmach and Prime Minister Harper:
Stop the Tar Sands Mr. Stelmach!

Stop the Tar Sands Mr. Harper!

Sign your name to the petition:
www.nonewapprovals.ca

Volunteer for Greenpeace :
Sign up and get involved at
www.greenpeacevolunteers.ca

Let others know. Share this on
Facebook, Digg, StumbleUpon.

As the national anthem ended and the Premier began addressing more than 1,000 supporters in the audience, Greenpeace activists dropped from the catwalk above the fundraising dinner with the large banner, stunning the premier for a moment as media and attendees turned their attention to the banner.

It has been frustrating for us all, watching Alberta’s Premier ignore the voice of the citizens he’s supposed to be serving while constantly bending to the demands of Big Oil. While the tar sands have secured themselves as the most environmentally destructive project in Canada’s history and one of the top greenhouse gas emitters in the world, the provincial government has been busy approving every single tar sands proposal that has come across its desk, despite the public outcry.

Tonight was a step, but the battle is far from over. We need you to get involved and speak out.

What you can do

Take action on the tar sands. As a Canadian, you have the right to demand that our leaders put a stop to our country’s most environmentally devastating project. Send the message to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach that our resources are not theirs to sell to the highest bidder.

Click here for the latest details about this action.

The Future of Cities:
How Sprawl and Racism are Intertwined

By Kevin  Danaher and Shannon Biggs and Jason Mark,
PoliPoint Press Posted on October 23, 2007,
Printed on November 5, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/65404/

The following conversation with  Van Jones is an excerpt from the new book Building the Green Economy:
Success Stories from the Grassroots (PoliPointPress, 2007) by Kevin  Danaher, Shannon Biggs, and Jason Mark. You can read more about the book
here.

  Van Jones is a passionate civil rights and human rights advocate. He
 combines practical solutions to problems of social inequality and
 environmental destruction, focusing on green economic opportunities for
 urban America. Jones grew up in rural Tennessee, graduated from Yale Law
 School, and works and lives in Oakland, California. He is the Co-Founder
 and President of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, which seeks to
 replace the U.S. incarceration industry with community-based
 solutions.

  Q. For the first time in human history, more than 50 percent of
people now live in urban areas. Where does the city fit in your conception
of environmental sustainability?

VJ: Cities have the capacity to sink or save the planet. The future
of all humanity, and most species and systems, will be determined by
what we choose to do with cities. The idea that the environment is about
critters and creeks is a thing of the past. We have to be thinking about
these things in terms of consumption and disposal processes of
mega-cities.

Q. Sprawl has a negative impact not only on farmland and open space
but on life in urban areas. How did this pattern of sprawl and
gentrification develop? Who wins and loses?

VJ: Sprawl is a response to racial fear and anxiety on the part of
white elites. The 'burbs were designed as a vehicle to get away from
people of color, investing more in the white infrastructure as they moved
away from the city, and the neighborhoods where people of color live.
The other side of that is the disinvestment for the communities that
remain behind; the money follows the new suburban development. Those that
remain in the inner city continue to lose in this scenario.

Q. You've talked about cities and land use as issues that interest
many groups: the suburbanites, environmentalists, and inner-city
residents. If both environmentalists and inner-city residents have an interest
in stopping sprawl, what's preventing them from working together?

VJ: Racism. It is the reason that people move away from each other.
People don't want to talk about why people call this a "good"
neighborhood or that one a "bad" neighborhood, but often it has to do with the
race of the people that live there. White people divorce themselves from
the bad neighborhoods and move to the suburbs. The black community has
a lot of built-up feelings about our history, about the racism we
experience. There is some healing that needs to take place there, so these
communities have some issues, and don't want to work with each other,
necessarily. There are a lot of feelings there.

Q. Many environmentalists genuinely want to work with other
communities to address these issues of common interest. What is thwarting those
efforts?

VJ: Those folks often speak about working together through "outreach"
-- outreach in the sense of "outreaching to" these people or those
people. Outreaching to the black community: "Well, we outreached to them
so 'they' could hear our agenda and get onboard with what we are
saying." This, as opposed to saying "let's go make some friends," building
relationships, creating relationships. Figuring things out from a place
where everyone's views are included. Relationships are give and take,
mutual aid and help. Outreaching is the white thing, it's about bringing
folks into what you are doing, and does not necessarily convey
understanding.

Q. What is the effect of the prison industrial complex (especially
juvenile prisons) on communities, particularly communities of color, and
how does that system impede progress toward a green city revolution?
VJ: The incarceration industry is the new Jim Crow; you don't have to
call him the "N word" if you just call him a felon. There are the same
amount of drug problems in the 'burbs that there are in the inner
city, but in the 'burbs the white kids get counseling, they don't go to
prison. Generally speaking, they only call the police in the 'hood. The
system has responded with compassion to white kids.
Again, the new Jim Crow is incarceration. This is the barrier that
separates people from the lives they want to live. You go to the back of
the line as a felon. You lose your voting rights, can't get a good job,
you're denied student loans. It is devastating. We spend less money on
public schools than on locking people up; it's far easier to go to
prison than to get a scholarship.

This distorts economic development. The current economic strategy is
to take poor black kids, put them in jail in rural areas, and give poor
white kids jobs as guards in that prison. That is the economic
strategy. Rural towns can't compete with industry, farms are all going away,
so prison is an economic boon for rural communities. Come on, we can't
come up with a better strategy than that? In California, for example,
nearly 10 percent of the state budget goes to the prison system, and that
could grow to 15 percent or even higher. When you lock up a state
budget like that, where is the money to retrofit buildings for energy
efficiency?

California is supposed to be a leader in terms of being clean and
energy efficient. So now, put these two together. If you take guards and
prisoners and send them all home, then give them green city jobs
instead. We could be retrofitting urban America instead of lives laying to
waste. Send them home with good work, with a mission, and real job skills,
and provide them with opportunity.

We can have a Gulag or a green economy. But we can't have both. If we
train former prisoners and guards to put up solar panels, they are
already on their way to becoming electrical engineers. If we train them to
double pane glass, they are on their way to be a glazer: a good union
job and green path out of poverty. Bamboo, it's so different than
timber, you can cut it and it grows back quickly. If we can train folks to
do the green thing, they can then walk to the front of the line in an
economy based on green jobs instead of an economy from pollution-based
jobs. That is where these issues connect. What we need is a green wave
that can lift all boats, that can lift folks out of poverty.

Q. How important is it to nurture efforts at grassroots democracy?
How can larger groups -- national groups -- help without taking over?

VJ: It's all got to come together, but it's not easy. The national
groups don't mean to take over and the local groups can sometimes be
schizophrenic: They want and need the help from the big players, but can
also resent it. The national groups can find that having the grassroots
connections gives their work legitimacy-it's sexy these days to have the
grassroots contacts, sexy and cool-but they also have some contempt
for the grassroots groups at the same time. Everyone just has to figure
it out, make it work. Case by case.

Q. You have said that "We are the heroes we've been waiting for." Can
you discuss what "going local" means in terms of creating big change?
VJ: I believe it's a both/and. I believe in both "bottom up" and "top
down." Focusing on the local is great, but you need federal government
on your side to make the big changes; we learned that in the civil
rights movement. The federal government has got to be provoked into
action. The local economy can't solve the problems by itself, and some
problems are too big to solve by local action alone.

Change is bottom up and top down. The grassroots have to push, and
the top needs to push. It's sort of an inside-outside strategy. Everybody
is going to have to do some work. There is no magic answer, no silver
bullet. It's going to be a group effort, cross-organizational. We need
to share and play well with others; be flexible and learn from each
other. The big change is going to take 20, 30, 40 years. Hopefully, in
terms of ecological collapse, we'll get it together enough in the next 10
years to buy us the time we need to do the work that will take longer.

But we're going to have to do it together.

© 2007 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/65404/

Residents, natives protest uranium mine; 300 participate in Sharbot Lake march

Tuesday July 10th 2007, 8:55 pm
Filed under: Resistance

Residents, natives protest uranium mine;

300 participate in Sharbot Lake march

Jordan Press
The Kingston Whig-Standard (Ontario, Canada)
Monday, July 09, 2007

A retired minister, John Hudson moved from Kingston to the Sharbot Lake area 15 years ago.

He moved for the scenery, the environment and the quiet, but all that could change and yesterday, he was preaching against a plan that would see uranium mined near his home.

Marching along Highway 7, Hudson said he’s worried about the environmental impacts from the proposed operation.

“I’m right down the river and I see enough crap coming down our river,” said Hudson, 70. “The bottom line is I don’t want a uranium mine at my back door.”

And neither did the estimated 300 people who marched along with Hudson, area residents and Sharbot Lake and Ardoch Algonquin First Nations members.

“We were hoping for 100,” said Doreen Davis, chief of the Sharbot Lake Algonquin First Nation. “I am just honoured and humbled that the people are here to support us.

Davis said everyone wants to see a full moratorium on mining the substance and the demonstration was designed to get the attention of upper levels of government.

“And if not, we’ll do this again,” she said. “We’ll continue until somebody listens.”

Yesterday’s march went from the intersection of highways 7 and 509 west to Highway 38. Along the way, the band of demonstrators grew as more people appeared on the road and joined the march.

Waving flags, chanting, singing, drumming and holding signs, the march had a simple message summed up on many of the homemade signs they carried and the T-shirts they wore: “No uranium mining.”

Provincial police closed off that section of the highway and re-routed traffic through the area for the one-hour march that police described as “extremely peaceful.”

Harold Perry, honorary chief of the Sharbot Lake Algonquin First Nation, said there is an obligation to fight the proposed mining operation.

“We can’t afford to have this kind of stuff going on,” he said. “I don’t want my daughter and the next generations to grow up with a thing like that.”

Mining uranium causes long-term environmental and health effects because of its radioactivity, said Joan Kuyek, national co-ordinator for MiningWatch Canada.

“In this case, the local communities are saying they don’t want it, the Algonquins are saying they want it and we support that,” Kuyek said.

A group of Algonquins have been at the entrance to the proposed mining site. The occupation is now into its second week.

Along with Algonquins have come area residents who oppose the project. Some have brought themselves, others food and supplies.

Frontenac Ventures Corporation has staked 400 claims over about 8,000 hectares in North and Central Frontenac. The land is a mix of private and Crown land, the latter being the subject of negotiations between the Algonquins and provincial government.

Frank Morrison is one of those people who found out the company has a stake on his property. He marched yesterday and said residents needed to back the Algonquins because it was the area’s lone hope.

Under provincial law, the land on native reserves isn’t available for mineral collection.

“The land claim is going to save us and if it wasn’t for that, we might as well pack up and go home,” he said.

Just like the march, the number of people taking up the cause is increasing, Morrison said.

“It’s just growing exponentially,” he said. “That’s what happens when people finally find out what’s going on here.”

“This,” he said looking up and down the mass of marchers, “is more symbolic than anything else.”

Hudson said he was concerned about the way the proposal was being handled with people such as Morrison simply being told the company had a right to mine their property.

“It will be interesting to see what the position of our provincial government will be,” he said.

Any hint of problems from mining uranium could cause damage to the area’s economy, said Norman Guntensperger, a councillor from Central Frontenac. Mining uranium could damage the area’s hope to attract more tourists and needed to be stopped, he said.

“We want to get the word out. I see this as the beginning of a long fight,” he said.

<<:>> <<:>> <<:>>

AlGONQUINS RESIST URANIUM MINING AND ASSERT INDIGENOUS SOVEREIGNTY:

In the past several months, members of the Ardoch Algonquin First
Nation and
Shabot Obaadjiwan First Nation have resisted potential uranium mining
on
their unceded territories. A corporation called "Frontenac Ventures"
have
been testing for uranium for several years. Since June 28, the site of
the
mine has been blocked by an encampment that continues to this day. Jenn
Tsun, a dissident member of the Ardoch Algonquin First Nation, provides
background to the resistance near Sharbot Lake, Ontario.

Background HERE!:

See other articles HERE, as the shit was hitting the fan in court over the weekend.

<<:>> <<:>> <<:>>

Compact Florsecent Light Bulb and MERCURY!!

It is (extremely) important to know that Compact Florescent Light bulbs contain mercury and should be disposed of properly.

Here is a link to more information:

This links is to energy star's info.

Here is a link to more information:

This links is to energy star's info.

Now let's look at this new CASH COW!!

Compact Fluorescent Lamp (CFL) - newer, highly
efficient lamps that screw into existing light bulb sockets
(in most cases) and resemble traditional bulbs in
appearance rather than the tubular style of regular
fluorescent lamps.


Fluorescent lamp - a tubular electric lamp having a
coating of fluorescent material on its inner surface
and containing vapor whose bombardment by electrons
from the cathode provides ultraviolet light that
causes the material to emit visible light.

High Intensity Discharge lighting (HID) - formerly
outdoor or special use lights that now are being produced
for indoor use; HID greatly increases the
amount of light produced.

Incandescent lamp - an electric lamp in which a filament
gives off light when heated to incandescence
by an electric current (incandescence means white,
glowing, or luminous with intense heat).

Lamp - "light bulb"

Lumen - a unit of luminous flux equal to the light
emitted in a unit solid angle by a uniform point source
of one candle intensity.

Restrike Time - the time it takes for a lamp to reach
full brightness when the lamp is first turned on; or if
the lamp is burning, the time it takes for the lamp to
restrike when power is switched off and then back on.

Source:
MSU is an Affirmative-Action Equal-Opportunity Institution. Michigan State University Extension programs and materials are open to all without regard to race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, marital status, or family status. Issued in furtherance of Extension work in agriculture and home economics, acts of May 8 and June 20, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Margaret A. Bethel, Acting Extension Director, Michigan State University, E. Lansing, MI 48824. This information is for educational purposes only.

tyler.blogware.com

The article above discusses the Australian phenomenae and Ontario's TIME LINE!!

Wednesday, April 18
View Article Ontario to ban old Edison bulbs
by Tyler on Wed 18 Apr 2007 02:28 PM EDT
Well, California made noise about it, Australia got the ball rolling, now Ontario is jumping in with its own ban on inefficient incandescent bulbs. This makes Ontario the first jurisdiction in North America to commit to a ban, though unlike the Australian target of 2010, Ontario's regulation won't kick in until 2012. The province has also been careful with its wording. It's not banning incandescent bulbs. Rather, it plans to ban inefficient lighting technology that would include current incandescent bulbs. It left the door open to innovation with regards to incandescent technology. No doubt, the government wanted to be sensitive to General Electric, which claims it is working on an incandescent bulb that will be just as efficient as compact fluorscent lights and which contain zero mercury. One could argue the Ontario ban should match Australia's timeline, but I think the fact that the province has drawn a line in the sand will have an enormous impact. It will be interesting to see how many other provinces and states follow
.

* * *

Some (excellent) posts I read on a yahoo!group!!

Martin says,

Consumers in dark over risks of new light bulbs

The problem is that they are trying to "guilt" us into believing the hype
about "good for the environment". It is B.S! Why is it that the citizen has
to always pay in the end for industries mistakes? They stand to make
billions but it is us, the consumer, that will pay the extra cost of the
cleanup. I won't use the new bulbs in the house but do have some outside. I
am trying them out. But as far as I can tell, they still burn out maybe last
a little longer but are the health risks worth it? Do we always accept the
government's assumptions that they are "safe"? There is a new cow hormone on
the horizon that is not safe for people but the cattle feed lots are going
to start using it. We are the guinea pigs alright! We had better wake up
quick around here before corporate amerika owns us!!
Martin

S. wrote:

Your reasoning rings true, often the legislature doesn't fully think about
how things will work or turn out before they pass laws. Although the bulbs
have worked well for me, you have me thinking about what to do with them
when they do burn out. And regardless of how well they work or don't work,
the government has no business telling people what bulbs to use in their
homes. What's next? we can only use Dial soap or Tide detergent?
Shawn

Virginia Comments: I just bought 2 of these "wonder" bulbs for the first time. I felt pious and virtuous. But the thing is - everything I own is secondhand!! So an occupational therapist goes to visit and sees the first bulb. I have no shade on the lamp so she can see the bulb. What does she say ...?

WATCH OUT!! These bulbs can blow up if the energy standard of the lamp is not correct.

I began to have visualizations of me turning on my lamp, my bulb blowing up, the glass shattering into pieces tearing holes in my lovely face, and deadening my body by the ingestion of MERCURY.

Forget so-called efficiency ...

See also:
and this
adn even this FOX NEWS story shows some of the baloney being spread about by so-called environmentalists.

Run yerself a google search called "Light bulb and mercury" and you can find plenty more.

And meanwhile, Reduce, reuse, recycle and RETHINK!!

Powered by ScribeFire.