Sportsmen Share Priorities With New Interior Chief

April 10 – A national sportsmen’s coalition looks forward to working with Interior Secretary Sally Jewell on continuing the important job of restoring balance to public-lands management and implementing oil and gas leasing reforms started by her predecessor.

Sportsmen for Responsible Energy Development congratulated Jewell on her confirmation by the U.S. Senate Wednesday and urged her to provide strong leadership to conserve clean air and water, fish and wildlife habitat and preserve the public-lands legacy that has helped shape the nation’s economy and identity.

“SFRED and millions of sportsmen believe in responsible development of energy resources on our multiple use public lands. We are not, however, willing to sacrifice fish and wildlife habitat, populations, water resources, and recreational opportunities to poorly planned development,” the CEOs and presidents of the coalition’s three lead partners wrote in an April 10 letter to Jewell.

The letter lists the coalition’s top six priorities and was signed by Larry Schweiger of the National Wildlife Federation, Whit Fosburgh of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, and Chris Wood of Trout Unlimited.

NWF: EPA’s McCarthy Deserves Fair Hearing, Clean Confirmation

April 10 – With the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee set to hold a hearing on the nomination of Gina McCarthy as Environmental Protection Agency Administrator on Thursday, the National Wildlife Federation urges a fair hearing and clean up-or-down confirmation vote.

“The Environmental Protection Agency will need her leadership as it continues working to confront the climate crisis,” said Larry Schweiger, president and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation. “While President Obama has made clear that he prefers to work with Congress to find bipartisan compromise on climate action, in the face of Congress’ continued failure to act meaningfully on climate change, it’s essential that the Environmental Protection Agency uses its Clean Air Act authority to finalize and implement limits on industrial carbon pollution.”

The National Wildlife Federation began an online campaign in key states on Monday urging U.S. Senate to support the clean water concerns of sportsmen and confirm McCarthy, part of a coalition campaign going online in 11 states. The ads read:

Clean water matters to [state]. It drives our economy and defines our values. No wonder 79% of sportsmen support the Clean Water Act. Tell Senator XX to stand strong for sportsmen and support Gina McCarthy for EPA.

• Click here to learn more about NWF’s efforts to advocate for wildlife-friendly renewable energy.

Water Bill Guts Environmental Review of Corps Projects

April 9 -  Fifty law professors from across the country have signed onto a letter asking for the removal of two provisions in the current version of the Water Resources Development Act that prevent effective environmental reviews of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposals.

“I have always considered Senator Boxer a friend to the environment and I’m shocked she would put her name on this bill,” said Holly Doremus, a professor of Environmental Regulation at the University of California–Berkeley School of Law. “The bill as it stands would allow the Corps to do an end-run around careful environmental review.”

This bill was co-sponsored by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Senator David Vitter (R-LA). The almost 300-page bill was introduced just three weeks ago on a Friday evening and voted on by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee the following Wednesday. The full Senate could vote on the bill as early as Thursday.

“The history of the Corps water program has all too often been a story of taxpayer dollars being poured into projects with greatly exaggerated benefits and massively underestimated costs,” said Zygmunt J.B. Plater, a law professor at Boston College. “As written, this bill puts the fox in charge of the hen house. If the bill passes, we’ll see even more taxpayer dollars sunk into dysfunctional projects that hurt the national interest.”

• Read the full letter here.

And now here are highlights from NWF in the news:

• Associated Press- Group: Dolphin, turtle deaths a sign of sick Gulf
• First Business News- Interview with Sara Gonzalez-Rothi
• Roll Call- Oil Pipeline Break Refocuses Keystone Debate on Risks of Spills
• The Hill- Green group ads urge vulnerable lawmakers to back EPA pick
• The Christian Science Monitor- What is killing California sea lion pups?
• Hawaii News Nows- Let Your Kids Have Fun in the Sun (and Rain)
• Baton Rouge Advocate – 3 years later, oil leak effects still unfolding
• Houston Chronicle’s Fuel Fix – Dolphin deaths still high after Gulf oil spill, environmentalists say Examiner.com Dolphins and turtles still in peril three years after BP oil spill and Louisiana coast frenetically eroding three years after spill
• Discovery News – Record Dolphin, Sea Turtle Deaths Since Gulf Spill
• New Orleans Times-Picayune – National Wildlife Federation says environmental effects of BP spill far from over

For more information, visit www.nwf.org/news

Tar sands refining complex in Alberta, Canada (Photo: Kris Krug)

1. The Supplemental EIS is mostly bad news. Few of the things we hoped would be included — such as climate impacts and threats to endangered wildlife like whooping cranes and woodland caribou — were seriously examined.
2. Remember all of those problems with tar sands pipeline spills? Apparently the State Department decided they weren’t worth paying much attention to, even after the biggest inland spill in U.S. history, spill risks aren’t adequately addressed in the SEIS.
3. Once again, Tribal communities are being left out of the conversation. The federal government is required to “meaningfully consult” with tribes on issues that affect them, but the SEIS ignores the concerns of Native American groups despite widespread opposition to the project.
4. Legal experts believe the State Department should have re-evaluated the entire project in light of new information that’s come up over the last year. For example, back when KXL was proposed, the US wasn’t producing nearly as much domestic oil as it is now. When the point of a review is to evaluate “purpose and need,” you would think they would actually evaluate whether we need it.
5. In a rare bit of good news, the SEIS acknowledged that tar sands oil is fundamentally different from conventional oil.

President Obama visited Iowa last August during the region-wide drought that decimated crops and cost U.S. taxpayers around $20 billion. Climate change, driven by use of fossil fuels like tar sands, is causing extreme weather events around the globe. (Photo: USDA)

Where Does That Leave Us on Climate?

There are lots of problems to pick apart here, but let’s tackle the big one: climate change. President Obama has cast himself as the leader who will bring us back from the edge of planetary catastrophe, which makes this Keystone report even more baffling. The pipeline alone is bad enough (the greenhouse gas equivalent of 4.6 million cars) and we know that if it’s built, it will drive more tar sands mining. Crazily, the State Department is figuring that Keystone XL would just be one of many pipelines coming out of Canada in the next few years, and therefore can’t be held responsible for the resulting climate catastrophe. But in fact, Keystone is the linchpin for future development in the tar sands region. Mostly as a result of the campaign against Keystone, we’re already seeing that oil companies are slowing investments in the tar sands — the self-fulfilling prophecy of “more development –> more US oil imports” is being proven wrong in real time.

And if Obama rejects the project, it makes it that much harder, politically and economically, for the next company to build a pipeline through the U.S.; precedent will have been set. In other words, the State Department has fundamentally ignored its own role in how this scenario plays out. If they allow pipelines to get permits, the tar sands will be developed. If they reject the permits, the oil industry will really struggle to get its dirty product out of Canada. Just take a look at the cage match they’re fighting over the “Northern Gateway” pipeline, the Canadian equivalent of Keystone XL, which is going nowhere fast, thanks to steadfast opposition from First Nations (tribal) groups and tens of thousands of other citizens north of the border.

According to Jim Lyon, NWF’s vice president for conservation:

If Keystone XL wouldn’t speed tar sands development, why are oil companies pouring millions into lobbying and political contributions to build it? By rejecting the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, President Obama can keep billions of tons of climate-killing carbon pollution locked safely in the ground.

NWF will be coming out soon with a more detailed analysis of the report, but right now we’re incredibly disappointed with what the State Department has put forward. Fortunately, we still have a chance to make our voices heard — there will be a 45-day public comment period, and you’d better believe we’re going to get loud. As I mentioned in yesterday’s post, this decision is ultimately President Obama’s to make, and we need him to stop the madness now. Keystone XL would take our climate to the point of no return. If he cares about his legacy, his kids, wildlife, or the billions of people around the world who are facing the looming specter of climate change, he has to say NO to this pipeline. There is no other option.

Speak up for people and wildlife! Tell President Obama to reject the Keystone XL pipeline and protect our planet.

“I think that would be an extremely strong signal [that Obama is serious about climate change action],” European Union climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard, said during a briefing with reporters in Washington. “That would be a strong signal to the world.”

Hedegaard’s remarks made it clear that a yes or no will have implications far beyond our borders — the United States wields a tremendous amount of influence over future efforts to reduce greenhouse gases, and Keystone XL is the biggest climate test the White House has faced in years.

Photo: TarSandsAction

“It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”

Even without the spectacle of Canadian diplomats bending over backwards to drag the planet into the dark days of “1984,” George Orwell could have written a novel on Prime Minister Steven Harper’s machinations. In recent months, Harper has withdrawn Canada from the Kyoto protocol on greenhouse gas emissions, slashed funding for scientific agencies and muzzled government scientists, all while promoting tar sands as a healthy addition to the world’s energy mix. And the Premier of Alberta, Alison Redford, left jaws dropped across the continent this week when she proudly described Keystone XL as “responsible energy development” despite her province’s skyrocketing emissions and record of environmental destruction.

NWF’s friends at Environmental Defense Canada issued a scathing breakdown of their government’s credibility gap, including this shocker:

Canada ranks among the worst performers in the developed world on climate change. In the most recent ranking of climate change performance, Canada was trailed only by Kazakhstan, Iran and Saudi Arabia, ranking 58th out of 61 countries.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Harper calls tar sands “ethical oil.” Up is down, black is green, oil is ethical, the planet is not in danger.

State Department’s Keystone XL review expected soon

Protesters at February 17th “Forward On Climate” rally in Washington D.C. (photo: 350.org)

With climate champion and former Senator John Kerry in the top spot at the State Department, we hope that the answers to those questions are good news. But ultimately, the decision is President Obama’s to make, and he’ll have to pick whether to stand with the oil industry or with the millions of Americans who have spoken out in defense of our planet. As TIME’s Michael Grunwald puts it, “Now is the time to choose sides…There are many climate problems a President can’t solve, but Keystone isn’t one of them. It’s a choice between Big Oil and a more sustainable planet. The right answer isn’t always somewhere in the middle.”

Speak up for people and wildlife! Tell President Obama to say “NO!” to the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.

Bob Allpress says Nebraska DEQ left his entire farm, including this federally protected Bald Eagle nest, out of its Keystone XL pipeline review

That’s right, the revised route—the one TransCanada told us we could trust to protect our wildlife, public lands and clean water.

National Wildlife Federation has already reported extensively on how tar sands production threatens Canada’s caribou and wolves. But America’s wildlife is also threatened by Keystone XL, as Big Oil’s rush to pad corporate profits bumps up against America’s conservation values.

Nebraska Landowner Sounds the Alarm

Bob Allpress, the Nebraska landowner who raised the red flag in testimony last month, charges that the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (the state agency tasked with examining the route through Nebraska) failed in their responsibility.

“Even though I contacted the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality several times, nobody from the DEQ ever contacted us nor inspected the route through our farm,” says Bob, who lives in Naper, NE. “If this report is this flawed within two miles of the South Dakota border, the entire report is suspect.”

After the DEQ ignored Allpress, NWF reached out to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, which contacted the U.S. State Department and asked them to shift the route away from this eagle’s nest and impose mitigation measures to protect eagles in the area. It remains to be seen whether the State Department will do.

TransCanada, the company trying to build the Keystone XL pipeline, might find a way around this particular problem—they may decide to re-route the pipeline a few hundred feet around the nest, or just build through the area and assume the eagles will find another home. But the bottom line is that TransCanada and the Nebraska DEQ failed to spot this problem when they had the chance, and it took a landowner and an outcry from conservation groups to even bring this problem to light.

New Route for Keystone XL Pipeline Just as Dangerous?

Bald eagles are back from the brink of extinction, but the tar sands industry has visions of dollar bills clouding their patriotism. (Photo: Art Goldenberg)

How President Obama responds will give us a clear view of his true priorities and determine—perhaps more than any other decision he makes—his conservation legacy.

The decision to move forward with the Keystone XL pipeline is currently up to President Obama and the U.S. State Department, who must review the project and decide whether to allow it to go forward.

Obama rejected the original permit application early in 2012, based mainly on concerns about damage to the Ogallala aquifer and other crucial resources in Nebraska. National Wildlife Federation and our partner groups in Nebraska are deeply troubled by the lack of consideration given so far to climate change and wildlife impacts, and the revised route still poses serious problems for the aquifer.

“Why are we risking our water—the main source of our state’s economy—for a foreign export pipeline?” asks Jane Kleeb of Bold Nebraska.

More Wildlife Species at Risk

In addition to Keystone’s game-changing (or if you believe NASA’s James Hansen, game-ending) effect on global carbon emissions, wildlife is at particular risk from tar sands development, pipeline spills and construction:

• In the event of a spill in Nebraska, the iconic sandhill cranes that migrate in vast numbers through the Platte River valley would be exposed to toxins like benzene. And at every river crossing along Keystone XL’s 2,000 mile route, fish habitat would be destroyed and the riparian system disturbed.
• Until earlier this year, it was official policy in Canada to hunt down and poison gray wolves as a “solution” to caribou habitat loss; a public outcry led by NWF caused the Alberta provincial government enough embarrassment to rethink that practice.
• Whooping cranes and hundreds of other species of migratory birds are seeing their northern nesting grounds bulldozed on an unprecedented scale as the oil industry expands its footprint in the Canadian tar sands region.
• The million-gallon Enbridge pipeline tar sands spill in Michigan killed or poisoned blue herons, muskrats, turtles, and dozens of other species. Yet we still don’t have state or federal laws requiring agencies to consider the unique impacts of tar sands spills, and according to Prof. John Stansbury of the University of Nebraska, “The bottom line is that a thorough and adequate study of the impacts has not been done [to date], and that includes the DEQ report.”

According to Dr. Doug Inkley, senior scientist at the National Wildlife Federation, “Bald eagle recovery is one of America’s great conservation success stories, something we can all be proud of. But oil companies’ priorities are so skewed that they can’t even be troubled to take wildlife into account. This situation is a reminder that the pipeline will affect wildlife from one end to the other.”

Tell the Obama Administration to reject Keystone XL and protect people and wildlife from dangerous tar sands!

Related Links:

• Learn more about bald eagles >>
• Check up on the Decorah Eagle Cam >>

Whether or not you plan to attend the 2013 Green Inaugural Ball, we want you to be a part of this celebration. We want to start President Obama’s next term with positive wishes and ideas for the future. And so, we’re collecting your Green Wishes.

What #GreenWish do you have for the future?

We’re asking you to send us your wishes for the president, our country and for your community using the hashtag #GreenWish on Twitter or leaving comments on this post. Please keep it positive—let’s unite around what we want to see in the future to protect our public lands, wildlife and great waters, and also what kind of clean, sustainable solutions we want from the president.

What will we do with your wishes?

Before you take the plunge and start thinking about your wish, we should probably tell you that we’ll be showcasing these green wishes on the many displays in the Newseum the night of the ball. We’ll be taking full advantage of the Newseum’s latest technology and live broadcasting your green wishes throughout the venue. Don’t have a Twitter account? We invite you to sign up for one here.

We’re looking forward to hearing your thoughts and wishes for President Obama’s second term. See you on Sunday!

Looking for ideas? Here are some sample wishes:

• “My #greenwish is to spend more time enjoying our country’s great outdoors!”
• “My #greenwish is to take my kids fishing on cleaner waters in Ohio.”
• “My #greenwish is for reforms to hard rock mining pollution laws.”
• “My #greenwish is for the U.S. to embrace more clean renewable energy!”

Tickets Still Available for the Green Ball

We still have a few general admission and VIP tickets available. Come join the celebration!

Purchase tickets to the Green Inaugural Ball >>

Heading to the ball? Tweet using the #GreenBall2013 hashtag, and don’t forget to include your #GreenWish.

We’re just days away from the 2013 Green Inaugural Ball, and we’re excited to announce the latest in who will be sharing the night with attendees.

Will.I.Am will once again perform at the Green Inaugural Ball, following up his appearance at the 2009 Green Ball.

Listen to Will.I.Am’s latest collaboration with Britney Spears here:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Also performing will be Camp Freddy, a band composed of established musicians: Steve Stevens (Billy Idol, Michael Jackson); Matt Sorum (Guns and Roses, Velvet Revolver, The Cult); Mark McGrath (Sugar Ray, “E” Network host of “Extra); Billy Morrison (Billy Idol, The Cult); Chris Chaney (Alanis Morrissette, Janes Addiction); Donovan Leitch (Nancy Boy, Actor).

More performances by: New Orleans native and master trombonist, Trombone Shorty; Nicholas David (The Voice); and music mixed by DJ Neville C.

Among those mingling in the crowd will be Washington Redskins players Darrell Green, Lorenzo Alexander, Kedric Golston and Chris Wilson; The West Wing actor Melissa Fitzgerald; entertainers Tate Donovan, Les (Survivorman) Stroud and Gina Gershon; comedian Stephanie Miller and race car driver Leilani Munter.

A Who’s Who of Politicos will also be at the Green Inaugural Ball, including Gov-elect Jay Inslee (Wash.), Senators Michael Bennett (D-Colo.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.),; and Representatives Elizabeth Esty, (D-Conn.), Tulsi Gabbard, (D-Hawaii), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Jared Polis (D-Colo.), Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.) and Peter Welch (D-Vermont).

And of course, from the Obama Administration, guests will rub elbows with Rachel Jacobson, Assistant Administrator for Fish and Wildlife; Bob Perciasepe, Deputy EPA Administrator; Jason Weller, Chief Natural Resources Conservation Service, among others!

Last week, we announced Musical Director for Grammy Award-winning recording artist Alicia Keys, Onree Gill; famed Latin percussionist Sheila E.; and singer-songwriter Mayer Hawthorne will also be performing. Stay tuned for more talent to be announced in the upcoming days.

If you haven’t purchased your 2013 Green Inaugural Ball tickets, purchase them soon before the event sells out.
Heading to the Green Ball? Don’t forget to tweet using the #GreenBall2013 hashtag.

Shelley Cohen is Chair of the Greening Committee for the 2013 Green Inaugural Ball. Ms. Cohen is an urban eco-mom with eighteen years of experience in environment and energy-related fields. She currently serves as a Senior Project Developer for Ameresco where she specializes in developing renewable energy and energy conservation projects, and is responsible for developing over 15MWs of renewable energy. Prior employment included jobs with EPA, the White House, and the office of Senator Joseph Lieberman (CT). Ms. Cohen’s green home includes eco-friendly materials, 12kw of solar PV, a cool roof, rain barrel, organic garden, and has been featured in local and national media. Ms. Cohen serves on the board of the National Wildlife Federation, and in 2012 was trained as a Climate Leader through the Climate Reality Project.

Oceanway Middle School on Earth Day with new outdoor classroom. Flickr photo by JAXPORT.

Over the past four years environmental education has found both a friend and foe in the Obama Administration, but at least we knew it was on their minds. Romney had been all but silent with regard to STEM, environmental education, childhood obesity and the overall health and wellness of America’s future workforce.

With the election finally behind us we can now look forward.  And as we do look forward, there are some familiar challenges ahead.  The Great Recession is still looming over us and because of this many agencies and programs are facing significant cuts in funding.   The Obama Administration essentially eliminated all environmental education funding in their FY 2013 budget request – including beloved programs at the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

This spring, outgoing Congressman Chip Cravaack of Minnesota amended a spending bill to prohibit the National Science Foundation from supporting Climate Change Education. While Rep. Cravaack will not be returning to Washington next year, the U.S. House of Representatives will very likely remain unfriendly to conservation and environmental education issues.

In the meantime however, thanks to the inability of Congress to come to an agreement on FY 2013 federal spending, environmental education has so far survived to fight another day when earlier this fall Congress issued yet another Continuing Resolution to keep the government funded at FY 12 levels. What does that mean for environmental education? Well, our programs will remain funded at last year’s levels until the 6 month CR runs out in March 2013 (or such time that Congress decides to take action).

While education as a whole was seldom addressed during the campaign, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (where we hope to attach No Child Left Inside) is long overdue for reauthorization.  The House and the Senate are far from being on the same page on the role of environmental education in ESEA, with elements of the NCLIA Act being included within the Senate bill last year but not in the House version.

We can expect that ESEA which is long overdue for reauthorization will be on the agenda for the 113th Congress.  The President expressed during his acceptance speech how important education is to America’s global competitiveness.  Although Democrats gained seats in the House this election, Republicans will remain in control with the Democrats remaining in control of the Senate.  Essentially we will be contending with the same divide.

So while there is hope for forward progress in the 113th Congress on environmental education funding and the No Child Left Inside Act, it will not happen without your help.  We must continue to hold the Obama Administration accountable for eliminating environmental and climate change education programs and urge them to support them next year.  We must ask Congress to continue funding these programs.  We must continue forward momentum with the No Child Left Inside Act in anticipation of the reauthorization of ESEA.  We hope you will join us by singing up for regular updates about the latest state and federal policy developments around environmental education as we work together on this critical issue in the coming year.

Take Action:  Click here to voice your support and help get America’s kids back outside!

Photo: Elvert Barnes

Only, last I checked, that hasn’t happened yet. We will hear the White House’s decision in a few short months, and here are five reasons why the country should expect a much different outcome:

1. The industry and its supporters have been wrong before

Pundits have long assumed that this pipeline was a done deal, but conventional wisdom isn’t the same as insight. Around this time last year, National Journal magazine polled “energy insiders” to see whether they thought KXL would get rubber stamped. More than 70% of these experts (I use the term loosely) said it would be approved before 2012, characterized by this sentiment:

“They’ve delayed it for a year to appease Big Green, but they will issue the permit in 2011.”

A month later, right before the massive, 12,000 person anti-KXL rally at the White House, the drumbeat was the same:

For the Obama administration, having an answer to high [gas] prices will be much more important in 2012 than it is today,” Kevin Book. managing director at the research firm ClearView Energy Partners, told CNN Money. ”We think it will get approved.”

We’re pretty close to throwing out those 2012 calendars and the pipeline still hasn’t been approved. Just sayin’.

2. Keystone XL has become a political liability

Opposition to tar sands is strong—and getting stronger (Photo: Lauri Gorham)

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.

A lot of this is due to Hurricane Sandy, which was a real wake-up call to a nation that had put climate change on the back burner for a couple of years. In an article for Forbes after the release of the poll, John Zogby noted the widespread and growing concern about extreme weather:

These results show the dramatic impact 2012′s extreme weather has had across party lines, with half of Republicans, 73 percent of independents and 82 percent of Democrats saying they’re worried about the growing cost and risks of extreme weather disasters fueled by climate change.

Corporate polluters have been shouting for a while that “Americans want this project!” and so the NWF/Zogby poll may sound like a big shift in public opinion,but it’s important to recognize what these studies measure and what they don’t. The NWF/Zogby poll took into account the basic fact that we can’t have a healthy planet and more tar sands; we need to choose one or the other. Previous polls only asked “should Obama approve KXL?” and didn’t put it in the context of a choice, or weigh how strongly people felt about the issue.

Although plenty of members of Congress still plug up their ears when you talk about about global warming, the Hurricane Sandy and this summer’s drought have helped create a a new political landscape—one where extremely polluting projects like KXL are unpopular and politically risky.

3. Big Oil bet big and lost

During the election, the fossil fuel industry and its allies spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to defeat pro-environment incumbents and replace them with politicians who would maintain the pro-polluter status quo. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that firing Obama was their top priority, given the progress his administration made on things like stronger mileage standards for cars and trucks. They might as well have lit that money on fire, for all the good it did them: Mitt Romney (“I’ll approve Keystone on Day One”) lost and, as my colleague Joe Mendelson describes, Big Oil’s hand-picked Senate candidates lost nearly every race despite shattering fundraising marks.

Obama and moderates in Congress owe the oil industry no favors.

4. We don’t need Keystone XL—and we can’t afford it.

If you read my last article, you learned that the United States is already a net exporter of refined oil products like gasoline, and pipelines like KXL are intended to send oil overseas, too. Tar sands companies aren’t interested in lowering your gas bill (quite the opposite, actually) but they are interested in getting more oil out of the ground and keeping their profits rolling in. Meanwhile, the rest of us pay a steep price.

A glimpse of the future? Hurricane Sandy caused massive coastal flooding on Long Island and elsewhere. (Photo: DVIDSHUB)

Consider this: the giant international insurance company Munich Re says that climate change is “one of the greatest risks facing mankind” and estimates that extreme weather events like Hurricanes Sandy and Katrina cost North Americans over a trillion dollars since 1980. We know that climate change worsens these events, and we know that burning tar sands (or any fossil fuel) worsens climate change, so essentially when we use tar sands oil we’re raising our own taxes and insurance premiums, even if it’s not reflected in your gas bill.

Why should we pick up the tab for oil companies?

5. The next generation needs him (and us) to protect their future

Photo: David Katz/Obama For America

The President, like most fathers, cares more about the two people in the middle of this photo than he does about anything else—and that’s the most important reason he’ll reject the Keystone XL pipeline. He knows that, at its core, this is a choice about what kind of world we want to leave to our children and grandchildren, and one that has a right answer and a wrong one.

Make your voice count! Tell the White House to say “NO!” to Keystone XL and other tar sands pipelines.

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.

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.