Symons identified October’s Superstorm Sandy as a “turning point” in how people are registering climate change in the national political dialogue, and referenced a Zogby poll of voters, taken November 7th, in which it is reported that 65% of voters believe elected officials should take action to mitigate climate change for future generations. But it’s not just voters advocating for legislation and calling attention to climate change and its effects. Symons referenced a new World Bank report, Turn Down the Heat:  Why a 4°C Warmer World Must Be Avoided–a call to immediate action to reduce carbon emissions from an institution that has not, historically, “been a leader of environmental consciousness.”

Audience at Symons’s University of Mary Washington presentation earlier this month. Photo credit Julian Keniry, NWF.

So, what can students do, and what role do colleges and universities play in this transition? Symons cited the strong turnout of young voters on November 6th as an important step, and encouraged that bloc to continue to let their legislators know that clean energy is an important issue to them. He discussed student activism around the Keystone XL pipeline, as well as the value in students gaining hands-on sustainability skills in the classroom, and carrying those skills through to the workforce. Symons lauded the leadership of the higher education sector, as campuses, more often than not, are models of sustainability inside and out–prime examples of efficient, low-impact and low-cost operations.

Jeremy Symons’s inspiring presentation was follwed by comments from Scott Sleisinger of the Natural Resources Defense Council, who reinforced the fact that this past election, the power of the people proved stronger than corporate polluter dollars (10 of the “Dirty Dozen” were defeated, and all 18 of the NWF Action Fund-endorsed candidates won their races), a trend Sleisinger says shows the waning power, politically and otherwise, of the fossil fuel industry. However, Sleisinger pointed out that we need to continue to pressure Congress to vote for clean energy, especially about the Production Tax Credit for Renewable Energy.

A closing message from the webinar emphasized setting our sights high–on eliminating carbon pollution for a healthier planet, building and supporting that infrastructure now, for the long-term, rather than continuing to support industries that are only profitable in the short term.

In reference to the title question of this blog, it may be more telling to draw the connection a different way, instead asking, “What effect does campus sustainability have on elections?” Students, faculty, staff and administrators are greening campuses more than ever before, and will continue to demand the same sustainability initiatives and standards in the workforce and in government.

Read about Jeremy Symons’s visit to University of Mary Washington earlier this month, where he helped students connect the dots among Superstorm Sandy, energy and the future.

Like Campus Ecology on facebook, and follow @CampusEcology, @YouthForClimate and @Greenforce on twitter.

Election Reaffirms Need For Bipartisan Cooperation On Conservation

November 7-Voters re-elected President Obama and rewarded conservation-minded Congressional candidates last night, particularly in the Senate where candidates like Montana’s Jon Tester and Florida’s Bill Nelson were re-elected and open seats were filled by Maine’s Angus King and New Mexico’s Martin Heinrich.

Larry Schweiger, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation, said today:

“We are excited that voters have sent so many conservation leaders to Washington, new faces and old. These elections have opened a window of opportunity to realign the politics of the environment. Looking ahead, the question is whether Democrats and Republicans will work together to address the conservation issues facing America. For that to happen, Republicans in Washington need to listen to the strong conservation views of younger voters, women, Hispanics and even sportsmen.

For more election analysis, check out these blog posts:

• After the Election: Climate Change Will Head to Top of the Agenda
• Election 2012 Results for Wildlife: New Opportunity for a Political Realignment
• A Brighter Future for Wildlife

And now here are highlights from NWF in the news:

• Mother Nature Network: Great Lakes’ bill of health: Legacy contaminants decline as new ones appear
• UPI: Pro-green group rallies post-election
• Wall Street Journal:  Environmental group sues NY over ballast rules
• The Hill: After Sandy, flood insurance reformers spring into action
• Associated Press: Go for charitable ‘adoption’ as holiday gift

For more visit www.nwf.org/news

We’re talking about it, we’re taking action…you’re talking about it, you’re taking action…so what about our government? Well, they talk about it…sometimes:

Graphic displaying the number of times representatives used the terms “climate change” and “clean energy” on the House and Senate floor over the past four years. Click on the picture to visit capitolwords.org.

With less than 72 hours to go before the first presidential debate, we are joining in the call to break the silence on climate. The upcoming debate is a perfect opportunity to really make some noise about our concern for this planet, and to push our politicians in the direction of clean energy.

Wednesday, October 3 is the first presidential debate in Denver, Colorado. It will air at 9 PM ET on a variety of basic and cable television networks, as well as online. In addition to coordinated online and “offline” actions between now and then, the Energy Action Coalition’s Power Vote campaign will be hosting an online live chat during the debate–your chance to engage with other green-minded young leaders watching the debate across the country, and to participate in coordinated actions to continuously push the message that the silence on climate will be broken. Check out their toolkit for hosting a debate watch, and make sure to register your event.

To turn your debate-watch gathering into a real party, make sure there are snacks, preferably of the patriotic variety. Uncle Sam ice cream cones, anyone?

Let the countdown begin!

Is your campus or eco-group hosting a debate watch party? Register the event! Can’t find an event near you? Host your own! Either way, join the online action. For more information, visit: http://www.powervote.org/breakthesilence 

We’ll be joining in the online fun, so send us a tweet during the debate and let us know your thoughts! @CampusEcology and @YouthforClimate 

Not on twitter? Like Campus Ecology on facebook and engage with us there.

Wealthy polluters are pouring unprecedented millions into advertisements in an effort to influence this election. Ordinary Americans who care about conservation and wildlife may not have the deep pockets of polluters, but they are speaking out.

Just this week, NWF’s Campus Ecology Program released a report: A Student’s Guide to How Corporate Oil, Gas and Coal Money Influences U.S. Energy Policy. Which is about—you guessed it—how polluters have bought their way to the front of the line on Capitol Hill. The effort is teamed up with Energy Action Coalition’s “Power Vote,” which aims to register youth and first time voters who want a say in our energy future.

Checking the Ads

Anyone who watches Mad Men knows advertisers are plugged into our psychology. How do we know what the truth is? Political transparency has become an issue on more and more radar screens, especially after Citizens United v. FEC. But how can you find out the truth during this election cycle? You’re in luck, there’s an app for that.

It’s called the SuperPACApp, and is available for iPhone users. It’s the Shazam for political advertisements. The phone listens to the ad and within seconds reports on:

1. What group funded the ad;
2. How much it costs and
3. Information on the accuracy of the ad.

This app makes the unprecedented spending on political advertisements more transparent—allowing the viewer to gain clarity on what they are actually watching and where it is coming from.

So the next time your eyes start glazing over after yet another attack ad, break out your iPhone. But be careful, you might find yourself looking forward to the next commercial break, just not for the reasons the oil industry wants you to.

Here are some other great resources that peel back the curtain on dirty money:

• Campus Ecology Report
• Sunlight Foundation
• Dirty Energy Money
• Center for Responsive Politics

(Photo: Todd Benson)

Here are some of the biggest myths about KXL, and the facts behind this massive threat to our wildlife and the planet’s future.

MYTH #1: Keystone is a jobs juggernaut.

FACT: On their website, TransCanada asserts that Keystone XL will create 20,000 construction and manufacturing jobs, and 118,000 “spin-off” jobs. Pro-Keystone politicians have consistently parroted these claims, but TransCanada’s job numbers are complete fabrications: The Washington Post fact-checkers gave these claims two “Pinocchios” and, according to the Cornell University Global Labor Institute, “The company’s claim that KXL will create 20,000 direct construction and manufacturing jobs in the U.S. is not substantiated” and “KXL will not be a major source of US jobs, nor will it play any substantial role at all in putting Americans back to work.” In fact, the State Department’s own study, which many pipeline opponents felt was tilted pro-industry, suggests that far fewer jobs will be created and most of them will be temporary and non-local.

MYTH #2: Keystone XL will improve America’s energy security.

FACT: The Keystone XL pipeline is designed for one thing—to send oil from Canada to the Texas Gulf coast, and from there to overseas markets. According to retired Brigadier General Steven M. Anderson (the US Army’s senior logistician in Iraq from 2006-2007), the pipeline “would set back our renewable energy efforts for at least two decades, much to our enemies’ delight. It would ensure we maintain our oil addiction and delay making the tough decisions regarding energy production, management and conservation that we need to start making today.” And as Anderson makes clear, “Canadian oil won’t replace imports from hostile countries because Texas refiners are serving global demand rather than domestic need.”

MYTH #3: Keystone XL is safe.

US Fish & Wildlife officers work to rescue birds after a massive 2010 tar sands pipeline rupture in Michigan (photo: USFWS-Midwest Region)

MYTH #4: The government review process for Keystone XL has been fair and thorough.

FACT: Perhaps most troubling, we still do not know whether the US State Department’s new assessment (in process now) will include consideration of climate impacts – the single biggest reason to stop this pipeline. And in the first go-round, State (the agency responsible for vetting the project) conducted a sham review during its analysis of TransCanada’s original proposal. State’s activities were tainted by a conflict of interest in favor of the project and they failed to assess pipeline safety issues with any rigor, inadequately consulted numerous Tribal nations, and neglected to protect Americans from eminent domain threats made by TransCanada. This included preferential treatment for TransCanada’s chief lobbyist (a former aide to State Department Secretary Clinton), as well as outsourcing much of the review process to a company who counts TransCanada as a major client.

MYTH #5: Keystone XL will reduce our energy prices.

FACT: According to its own secret documents submitted to the Canadian government, TransCanada expects the pipeline to increase gas prices in the Midwest by up to 15 cents per gallon. Currently, a surplus of gas in the region means that our prices stay stable. If the pipeline is built oil companies will be able to send their product to the Gulf coast for export, which will reduce this surplus and drive up costs for Midwestern consumers.

MYTH #6: Canadian tar sands will be developed anyway, even if we don’t build the pipeline.

FACT: Right now, Canada’s oil companies are stuck with two buyers: Canada and the United States. Keystone XL is by far the easiest route for the industry to send crude oil through the US to international ports (and access to lucrative foreign markets), which would drive further investment in the tar sands region. It’s a bit like the line from “Field of Dreams” — If you build it, they will come. The Canadian government has made a lot of noise about bypassing the US entirely in favor of the proposed “Northern Gateway” pipeline that would stretch from Alberta to Canada’s west coast, but its chances are shaky due to strong opposition in British Columbia and from native communities along its path. Any western route may face decades of litigation, by which point the tar sands may be obsolete as clean energy technology matures. Other pipelines are being proposed in the US, but they face the same level of opposition as Keystone.

Keystone XL threatens iconic species like the Sandhill crane (photo: Richard Hurd)

MYTH #7: The pipeline poses no risk to the Ogallala aquifer.

FACT: The Ogallala – a vast underground reservoir – is one of the world’s most important sources of freshwater for drinking and irrigation. In Nebraska, TransCanada’s proposed route cuts directly across the aquifer and through fragile ecosystems geologically similar to the Sandhills region, threatening the livelihoods of local farmers and ranchers, wildlife and millions of people who depend upon the Ogallala. Tar sands oil contains high concentrations of benzene and other carcinogens, which raises the potential for widespread water contamination.

MYTH #8: Keystone XL will generate billions in tax revenue for American federal, state, and local governments.

FACT: TransCanada claims that KXL would generate nearly $6 billion in property and other taxes, but the Cornell study repeatedly shoots down TransCanada’s economic claims, saying that “What is being offered by the proponents is advocacy to build support for KXL, rather than serious research aimed to inform public debate and responsible decision making.” Like their jobs figures, this tax revenue estimate seems to have materialized out of thin air, especially when you realize that the original Keystone pipeline has fallen far short of projections for tax revenue.

Decision Time

Regardless of who wins the election in November, tar sands and other forms of “extreme energy” like deepwater drilling and natural gas “fracking” will continue to dominate the conversation. But in our rush to feed our appetite for cheap power, it’s essential that we don’t lose sight of sustainable answers like strong automobile gas standards, energy efficiency, and next-generation technologies like solar and offshore wind — the real answers to many of the problems that Big Oil has dumped in our laps. Keystone XL would come with an enormous price tag for our health and North America’s wildlife, would have a devastating impact on Earth’s climate, and would do next to nothing for our energy security or fiscal problems. It’s an easy decision.

Speak up to protect wildlife and our communities from the threat of tar sands oil! Tell your elected officials to stop the Keystone XL pipeline and halt Big Oil’s plans to keep us hooked on the world’s dirtiest fuel.

Learn more at NWF.org/tarsands