With protests this weekend against Keystone XL in the nation’s capital, the poll shows that the President has a mandate to fight climate disruption. Keystone XL takes the fight to slow climate change in the wrong direction.

Here’s the two key Zogby findings:

Support for dirty fuel from Keystone XL is dwarfed by support for clean energy. Last year, thousands protested at the White House to urge the Administration to abandon Keystone XL. Another action is set for this weekend in Washington, DC.

• Asked to pick the highest priority to help solve America’s energy challenges, twice as many voters select renewable energy like wind and solar power (38 percent) than any other choice. Independents favor wind and solar over fossil fuels by a 4-to-1 margin – 48 percent pick renewable energy while just 12 percent select the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline and only 11 percent prioritize more oil and gas drilling on America’s public lands.
• Voters also expressed frustration with polluter influence peddling. Two thirds of voters (67 percent) say they’re very or somewhat concerned that political donations by oil, gas and coal industries are influencing politicians in Washington to approve policies that benefit their corporations.

That’s right folks, Keystone XL barely gets out of single digits, while support for clean renewable energy is two to four times higher.

The Keystone XL carbon bomb has been said to be the pollution equivalent of putting six  million additional cars on the road. The pipeline is designed to carry tar sands, a dirty heavy oil that is far more polluting. At a time when President Obama says need to be reducing carbon pollution, Keystone XL takes us exactly in the wrong direction.

The poll of 1,016 actual voters was conducted on November 7 and has a margin of error of plus or minus three percent.

Superstorm Sandy a Wake Up Call

Hurricane Sandy couldn’t have made it clearer that society will continue to pay a high price for gorging on carbon. After a summer’s worth of unprecedented devastating heat and weather related events that will costs billions, Sandy’s the latest high priced  wake up call from Mother Nature, estimated to cost us tens of billions.  Economically, we cannot afford to further accelerate the already alarming pace of debilitating weather events.  Morally, we cannot leave our children an inhospitable world.

You cannot build Keystone XL and be serious about addressing climate change.  The math doesn’t add up. EPA says the lifetime carbon pollution emissions would be over 1 billion tons, and another estimate says it’s the equivalent of putting six million additional cars on the road.

The Keystone XL pipeline presents a choice. Get serious about climate, or double down on high carbon tars sands for decades.  A final denial of the project would send a clear signal that we are turning away from climate calamity and towards a clean energy future.  Allowing it would further ignite the climate bomb.  The American public is demanding climate action and rejecting the fossil fuel industry’s well financed plea for business as usual.  It is time for the Obama Administration to say no to Keystone XL and yes to a clean energy future for our children.

Piping Plover | Photo by NatureFramingham / flickr

The devastation that Hurricane Sandy brought to the East Coast was a strong reminder of the action needed to combat the impacts to wildlife of climate-fueled disasters by addressing climate change and protecting wildlife habitat.

The superstorm destroyed communities and wildlife habitats–including crucial habitats for piping plovers and many other shorebirds.

Wildlife Supporters Making a Difference

Wildlife advocates like you pledged to “vote for wildlife” when you went to the polls and made sure that your friends voted as well.

You urged the candidates and presidential debate moderators to ask about climate before the elections, and kept the pressure on to make the connection between superstorm Sandy and the increasingly frequent and devastating extreme weather that scientists see worsening because of climate change.

In key states where conservation-champions were in tight races, supporters of the NWF Action Fund, the political wing of NWF, helped get our message into the media, air TV ads, and get voters to the polls. That support made the difference between winning and losing.

In fact, all of the Democratic and Republican candidates endorsed by the National Wildlife Federation Action Fund won their important races, thanks to the support of NWF Action Fund members.

The success of candidates endorsed by the NWF Action Fund shows that the financial resources of Big Polluters are no match against strong grassroots support for candidates who are on the right side of important conservation issues.

Successes for Wildlife

What does the election mean for wildlife?

Climate Change

When it comes to climate change–the greatest threat to wildlife today–if President Obama’s campaign acts on his statements about our warming planet, we can look forward to continuing to tackle pollution from power plants. Right now, we are working with the Obama Administration to finalize limits on carbon pollution from new power plants and now have the opportunity to push for pollution limits on the biggest single source of carbon pollution in the country–our nation’s already-existing power plants.

Tar Sands

The Keystone XL tar sands pipeline was a big loser. In race after race including in Florida where Senator Bill Nelson was victorious, Senators opposing Keystone were rewarded by voters. We are now counting on President Obama to reject the pipeline that would set us in the wrong direction climate change.

Federal Budget

We must reach a fair and balanced budget. Voters sent conservation champions to Congress who will help make sure future budgets do not further endanger wildlife with deep and disproportionate cuts to conservation programs that have already faced damaging cuts. These investments are small–less than 1 percent of all federal spending–and deliver huge benefits to wildlife by keeping our waters clean and taking care of public lands where our panthers, bison, wolves and polar bears live.

Clean Water Act

With the strong leaders in the Environmental Protection Agency continuing their work, river otters and fish across our nation have hope that our small streams and rivers that have lost the protection of the Clean Water Act will once again be safeguarded from destruction and pollution. The Environmental Protection Agency and other agencies can also continue their  efforts to restore the Great Lakes, the Chesapeake Bay, the Mississippi River Delta and other cherished waterways.

What Happens Next

Exactly what happens next depends on whether Democrats and Republicans will work together to make progress on the important conservation issues facing America–and whether the GOP decides to return to the party’s Teddy Roosevelt conservation roots.

As Larry Schweiger, President and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation, said today in response to the election results:

The election should be a wake-up call for any politician who doesn’t have a responsible plan for conservation, particularly on the heels of superstorm Sandy. Along with the extreme droughts and wildfires of the past summer, Sandy has not only increased the urgency of tackling climate change, but also thrust the environment back into the spotlight.

Winning More Fights for Wildlife

The devastating impacts of Hurricane Sandy are the latest in a long string of extreme weather events fueled by climate change that continue to threaten our wildlife. This year alone, record wildfires in the west forced moose to flee their burning mountain habitats and extreme droughts left many black bears searching desperately for food.

Now that the elections are over, it’s up to us make sure our elected leaders will take action to get critical policies passed to protect these and many more wildlife from climate change–before it’s too late.

It might not be easy–and we know Big Polluters and special interests will be a strong opponent–but together we can win more critical fights against Big Polluters and continue to create a brighter future for plovers, moose and black bears.

Help protect crucial habitat from worsening superstorms–take action to support limits on carbon pollution from coal-burning power plants.

Hurricane Sandy destroyed crucial habitat for imperiled piping plovers. Photo: Richard Seeley

Ready, Set, Vote!

Voting for wildlife-friendly candidates is bigger than any one race on November 6th. It means looking at your ballot before you go to the polls, researching candidates’ positions on key issues for wildlife, and making sure you have a plan to vote in person on November 6th or by absentee ballot.

Know Who and What You’re Voting For

Look at your ballot and compare candidates’ positions at Vote411.org. You can take notes with you into the polls on which candidates and proposals you plan to vote for.

In addition to voting for pro-wildlife candidates, residents in a number of states will have the opportunity to vote for ballot initiatives that have potential to shape the future of our wildlife and wild places. For example, residents of Michigan can vote YES on proposal 3 to help more of the state’s energy come from renewable sources such as wind and solar.

Know When and Where to Vote

Locate your polling place for voting and make a plan for what time you will vote on Nov. 6th.

Help Pack the Polls

Studies have shown that people are more likely to vote if they hear that their friends and neighbors will be voting, too. So please encourage your friends and family to vote, and make sure they have rides to the polls!

Defeat Big Polluters at the Polls

This past July, I saw record fires blaze through communities near my home in Colorado and severe droughts leave local black bears desperate for food. And just last week, Hurricane Sandy devastated not only communities across the East Coast, but also wildlife–crossing more than one hundred National Wildlife Refuges and destroying crucial habitat for imperiled piping plovers and many more shorebirds.

Yet, as these record-breaking extreme weather events–all with clear links to climate change–become more and more common, the fossil fuel industry continues to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into attacking pro-environment candidates and pushing a reckless agenda that puts their profits before the safety of communities and wildlife.

By researching candidates’ positions and voting, people like us who care about wildlife and vote can fight back against Big Polluters whose reckless behavior is increasingly putting wildlife in harm’s way.

Please SHARE with your friends to make this the largest voter turnout for wildlife ever!

Thanks for making your voice heard for wildlife this election!

In an instant, climate change can realign politics. Here, Democratic President Barack Obama tours devastated parts of New Jersey with Republican Governor Chris Christie.

The road to Election Day has gone from sarcastic remarks in Tampa, to two debate moderators apologizing for not asking the climate change question, to Republican standard bearer Gov. Chris Christie touring his devastated home state with President Obama, to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg penning an op-ed declaring that action on climate change is the central electoral issue.

Pundits like Politico’s Mike Allen have now given voice to what many strategists are already saying.  Sandy and climate change may have changed the campaign’s ultimate outcome.

Sandy has also brought into focus that politicians risk their well-being when the impacts of climate change are ignored.  The year 2012 has seen record drought throughout the Midwest, heat waves scalding our cities, the nation’s largest outbreak of West Nile Virus and wildfires torching homes and millions of acres.  All of these events hit the electorate at the personal level impacting families, property and communities.

Poll after poll has shown the public awaking to climate change’s role in exacerbating and accelerating all of these impacts. Combined with the steady and expanding stream of images of Sandy’s destruction, these impacts and events take the nation to Katrina 2.0. So whatever the outcome next Tuesday, the person sitting in the Oval Office will have to act to address the unfolding climate crisis because we all know the next extreme weather event is just around the corner.

Before you vote next week, you can send a message to the candidates that you want them to talk about climate change and protect wildlife.  Take action here.

Wetlands along U.S. coastlines and around the world are at risk from sea level rise. | Photo: NOAA

As Secretary of State Clinton noted last week when speaking on energy diplomacy, climate change is central to global economic, environmental and security interests.

Rising sea levels will not only affect Florida–where the debate is being held–but nations across the globe. Worsened floods in low-lying nations, droughts in arid regions and other natural disasters will lead to new conflicts over refugees and resources, calling for U.S. support and resources.

Dangerous Omission of “Climate Change” in Debates

One cannot easily talk about energy and foreign policy without using the words “carbon pollution” or “climate change”, yet that is exactly what the candidates, debate moderators and media have managed to do up to this point.

The omission is a dangerous one.

If the avoidance continues, it will be the first time since 1984 that the debates have been silent on climate change–as Orwellian a denial of the truth as there ever was.  As Americans prepare to vote and candidates lay out their plans for being a world leader in the foreign policy debate, avoidance of the climate change elephant in the room must stop.

Voters Petition Bob Schieffer to Ask About Climate

Noting the threat of climate change to ecosystems around the globe, over 22,400 supporters of the National Wildlife Federation signed a pledge urging Bob Schieffer, host of Face the Nation and tonight”s debate moderator, to ask the candidates to speak to climate change during the final presidential debate. These voters want to hear the candidates address climate change, signing the petition saying:

Now is the time to answer the questions that are critical to our nation’s role in the international community and critical to me: what are the presidential candidates’ plans to tackle climate change for the sake of my family, our wildlife and future generations?

Addressing climate change is a global issue and speaks to values all of us hold– leaving our children an environment and world that is better off than we inherited.

This summer’s extreme weather harmed our nation’s communities, crops and wildlife–and mirror crises happening across the globe. They are a poignant warning that these problems and impacts will escalate in the future unless we begin to tackle the climate change crisis.

Mr. Schieffer, please take this seriously the implications of climate change to our nation’s foreign policy by prompting the candidates to address climate in their remarks during the final presidential debate.

Be a Voice for Wildlife Across the Globe

Help put the spotlight on climate change before Election Day.

In fact, in the post-debate coverage the moderator, Candy Crowley said “I had that question for all of you climate change people,” but that she wanted go “go with the economy” –completely missing the point that shifting to renewable energy and building energy efficient technology is critical to creating jobs and revitalizing our economy. At the same time, the impacts of climate change are causing widespread damages in the U.S. and globally.

The avoidance of climate change by the media and the candidates must end before voters go to the polls on Election Day.

Urgent Threat to Polar Bears

New satellite data just revealed that polar bears’ Arctic ice melted to a new record low this summer–retreating from areas at the edge of the Arctic Ocean where polar bears most need the ice to hunt for seals–and leaving many of the bears desperate for food.

Every summer, a portion of Arctic ice melts and then forms again in the fall, but the ice is melting earlier and melting more now than any other time on record. In fact, the area of Arctic ice that melted this summer was an incredible 49% above the average from 1979 to 2000. The additional ice that melted is an area nearly double the size of Alaska.

In the face of the urgent threat polar bears, we must ensure that voters hear whether candidates running for Congress or the Presidency support using more clean energy and setting strong limits on carbon pollution to address climate.

Presidential Candidates Must Address Climate Change

In 2009–when strong legislation to fight climate change passed the U.S. House and had the backing of President Obama–the only thing stopping us were a few pro-Big Polluter members of the U.S. Senate. Making climate change a part of this year’s election issues is critical to being able to address global warming.

Polls are showing that undecided voters–who the candidates want to sway–care deeply about climate change.  Make sure climate change is once again in the national spotlight, so that voters can find out which candidates plan to fight climate change before they cast their ballot.

We have an opportunity in these next few weeks to get climate change back in the national spotlight before Election Day by urging Bob Schieffer, the moderator of the final presidential debate, to ask the candidates their positions on addressing climate change.

Be a voice for polar bears–shine the spotlight on climate change before Election Day.

For me, the highlight of the interview was the statement Congressman Ryan made in support of the virtues of the Clean Water Act—which for four decades has not only led to more drinkable, swimmable and fishable waters for millions of Americans, but has also played an important role in protecting vital wildlife habitat.

“The Clean Water Act has been helpful too, in making sure that wetlands are protected so that there’s more than a one-for-one replacement in some instances. That’s a good thing. We believe that wetland conservation is a critical part of conservation. Don’t forget that hunters are the best conservationists there are in America.”

Duck hunting in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

Unfortunately, Congressman Ryan has recently cast several votes that would only serve to weaken the Clean Water Act.

This year, he voted against an amendment to the House Energy & Water Appropriations bill that would ensure headwater streams and wetlands enjoy full Clean Water Act protections.  The Moran amendment would have struck a policy rider included in the bill to keep the US Army Corps of Engineers from clarifying the definition of waters under the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act.

And last year, he voted for legislation that would undermine the core of the Clean Water Act’s ability to protect waters and wetlands.  Specifically, H.R. 2018 would prevent the federal government from promulgating water quality standards and would remove critical EPA permitting and oversight authority of dredging and filling of wetlands and waters.  

Healthy wetlands mean better duck seasons.

As duck season is opening across the country—and sportsmen and women are taking to the field with friends and families—many are reflecting on the quality of their outdoor experiences.  Given the countless hours spent hip-deep in our nation’s wetlands, waterfowl hunters understand better than most what curtailing laws like the Clean Water Act would really mean. To the extent that both presidential campaigns want to compete for the support from hunters, anglers and other outdoor enthusiasts they should lay out a clear agenda on how they would better wildlife and wildlife habitat including through enforcing the Clean Water Act.

The Candidates’ Positions on Climate Change

President Obama acknowledged the seriousness of climate change and extreme weather it worsens during his speech at the Democratic Convention. As president, he proposed comprehensive climate change legislation that passed in the House of Representatives, but stalled in the Senate. Since then, the EPA has decreased carbon dioxide by addressing it as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act–doubling fuel efficiency standards for vehicles and setting strong limits on carbon pollution from coal fired power plants. Yet, we do not have any indication from Mr. Obama what his plans are for the next four years to address climate change.

Governor Romney has varied in his position on climate change. He wrote in his book, “I believe that climate change is occurring” and “human activity is a contributing factor.” Then last year on the campaign trail that “We don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet.” In his Republican Convention speech last month, he cracked a joke mocking the need to slow the rise of the oceans. Like Mr. Obama, we do not have any indication how Mr. Romney proposes to address this worsening issue.

Extreme Weather Impacts from Climate Change

Extreme weather caused by climate change has been impossible to miss this summer–harming communities, causing crop failure, and leaving wildlife hungry. July was the hottest month ever recorded in the U.S. September saw record low Arctic ice. Undecided voters are expressing that they are concerned about climate change and it could be a factor in their voting come fall.

Yet, the candidates have not engaged in meaningful debate on climate change or laid out their plans for voters to compare.

On October 3rd, they will be in Colorado for the first presidential debate–where the extreme drought and heat has devastated agricultural crops and stunted the wild foods that on which wildlife depend.

The Climate Question in the Presidential Debates

We just delivered over 150,000 petition signatures of Americans from across the nation to Jim Lehrer, the moderator of the first presidential debate, urging him to ask the candidates to lay out their positions on climate.

Share this image on your Facebook page, then post a message on the PBS NewsHour’s Facebook page telling presidential debate moderator Jim Lehrer you want him to “Ask a question about climate” http://www.facebook.com/newshour

Millions of voters will get their information about the presidential candidates by watching the debates next month. It is crucial Americans hear where candidates stand on climate change before voting on November 6th. As we have seen all summer with fires in the West, drought in the Midwest, and flooding in the Southeast–climate change is wreaking havoc on wildlife and threatening future generations.

Keep the Momentum Going

 Post a comment on PBS NewsHour’s Facebook page urging Jim Lehrer to “Ask a question about climate.”

Then, share this forest fire image on your Facebook page to help more people urge Jim Lehrer to ask President Obama and Governor Romney to lay out their plans on climate change.

Photo by Theresa Thompson

The weeks leading up to election 2010 were exhausting, from helping family members navigate absentee ballots, to engaging the faith community.  Not to mention taking part in political conversations, strategy sessions and debates pertaining to urban cities across the Great Lakes region.

In cities across the region attack ads, partisan sensationalism and over-the-top accusations defined the electoral season.  Solutions, or even references to greening our urban centers, were basically nonexistent.

Public policy makers up for election throughout the Great Lakes region barely mentioned urban vitality, surplus land reuse, urban farming, alternative energy, oil spills or the impact of climate change. There was no big push for urban recycling, stronger but greener cities, neighborhood preservation or green uses for vacant lands and buildings.  Mum was the word – but why?

Well, consider several factors.  First, although urban areas are widely recognized as the engines of economic prosperity, and essential to the Great Lakes regions renewal, to date green talking points and campaign slogans have not proven catchy in our cities.

Secondly, the urban electorate and voter turn out during off year elections play a major role in what political campaigns focus on – or not.

Then there are those in politics who view green advocates as tree-huggers that lack diversity, in other words, not quite the political mainstream.  Conversations behind the scenes revealed that many state and federal candidates view urban sustainability as a local issue (city, township, village, etc.) and they do not fully understand the local implications of climate change.

So, what do the Great Lakes region’s older industrial metropolitan areas do now? Having served both as an advocate for change and then on the other side as an elected official, the suggestion would be a “both and” not an “either or” approach.

Sustainability and climate change advocates must remain vigilant while reconfiguring our strategies based on which party is in control, which person is in place and what priorities are set.   We have to keep sounding the alarm that over the last 25 years cities in the Great Lakes region have undergone drastic changes.  The kind of changes that warrant state and federal policies that leverage, reflect and fund these new realities.

Compartmentalization can no longer be the order of the day.  We must understand
the connections between the environment and social issues to effectively
address:

• Climate change and health concerns specific to a rising senior population
• Retrofitting housing and assisting residents on fixed incomes
• Green jobs and felon re-enfranchisement, displaced autoworkers and single heads of households
• Air quality and asthma rates
• Technical needs and public education
• Smart growth and managing land inventories
• Linking central cities to their suburban areas and addressing race relations
• Comprehensive green planning, environmental justice and brownfield remediation and including voices and views of color
• New sustainable communities along with stormwater management, aligned public
• Transportation and insurance redlining
• Leveraging our regions university and medical center assets and at the same
• Time addressing higher education affordability
• Energy conservation and utility rates
• Urban sprawl and wildlife preservation

The list is infinite and the old suburb vs. inner city political barriers are outdated.

Urban centers within the Great Lakes region are rich in opportunity to address complex green challenges that now necessitate integrated, holistic and multidimensional responses.

Policy makers are not all knowing so let’s not assume otherwise. Send the winners of election 2010 a note of congratulations, introduce yourself and let them know that you will be in constant contact.  Attach a list of green solutions and a set of green talking points of your choice and then…hold them accountable.

Learn more about the NWF’s Great Lakes Urban Initiatives and Fair Climate work.

Click here to view the embedded video.

I cannot recall an election where the choice between a clean energy and dirty energy future has been so stark as the one taking place next week.   Although energy is not necessarily the main focus of the debates, you can tell that the fate of our energy future is on the line by following the money.

Oil companies are spending millions of dollars to influence next week’s elections.  A report released this weekend from Climate Action Network Europe shows that a significant chunk of this money comes from foreign corporations, specifically European oil companies.    What do these foreign companies expect to get in return for their investment in our elections?  The report shows a consistent pattern in giving:

The European companies are funding almost exclusively Senate candidates who have been outspoken in their opposition to comprehensive climate policy in the U.S., and candidates who actively deny the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and is caused by people.

In other words, Big Oil and its allies are trying to stymie the nation’s shift toward clean energy solutions and to keep us mired in our dependence on fossil fuels.  So the choice is clear – get out and vote for the candidates promoting a clean energy future and against the fossil fuel dinosaurs.