By Moms Clean Air Force

This was written by Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins, Chief Executive Officer, Green For All:

As we work to build a healthy green economy, Latinos in America have a critical role to play. It’s not just because of growing influence at the voting booth. Latinos make up a huge portion of our workforce — and it’s getting bigger every day. By 2050, a projected 33 percent of American workers will be Latino.

And jobs that help keep our air and water clean are an area of tremendous interest to these workers, according to a poll by the National Council de La Raza (NCLR) and Sierra Club. Nearly 90 percent of Latinos polled said they’d prefer to work in clean energy industries than fossil fuels.

That makes sense, because there is a bright green future ahead for workers in these industries. A recent NCLR report shows that Latinos stand to gain tremendously by working in green jobs — especially in “hot spot” cities like Albuquerque, Los Angeles, Little Rock, Knoxville, and McAllen, Texas.

But these opportunities aren’t just on the horizon — they’re here. Already, Latinos all over the country are leading the way in promoting sustainable business and healthy jobs.

Just look at Gabriel Mandujano, a Green For All partner who founded Wash Cycle Laundry, a Pittsburgh company that focuses on shrinking the environmental footprint of the laundry business while providing quality job opportunities for local workers from disadvantaged communities. Or Diana Teran, who started La Tuana Tortillas, a Tucson company that helps fill the need for healthy, local food with its natural, vegan, sustainable tortillas.

Meanwhile, Latinos are working to cultivate resilience and sustainability in communities around the country. Green For All Fellow Luis Perales recently spoke to members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute about the impacts of climate change on Latinos. Perales, who founded Tierra y Libertad Organization, is working with local leaders in Tucson on a Barrio Sustainability Project focused on solutions like rainwater catchment systems and neighborhood food gardens.

Green For All launched a new Spanish language website that provides information about environmental issues and materials to help organize local communities to promote sustainability.

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Molly Rauch

The major law regulating chemicals in commerce is dizzying. The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) was passed 37 years ago this week. It’s never been amended, updated, or reworked, and its outdated approach harms our children.

In the 37 years since TSCA was passed, we’ve experienced major advances in the way we protect children from automobile injuries. Advances in this area contrast just how backwards it is to use a 37 year old law to protect children from chemical exposures.

In the past three decades, car seat standards have significantly improved the chances of a child surviving a car crash. We’ve gone from unrestrained children roaming freely in the back seat, to a regimented, research-based series of directives reinforced by regulation.

These days, you can’t be sent home from the hospital without an infant car seat for your newborn baby.

If only the same could be said for industrial chemical exposures.

More than 80,000 chemicals commonly used in the United States have never been fully assessed for toxic impacts on human health and the environment. Because children are physiologically more vulnerable to adverse health effects from chemical exposures, this glaring regulatory lapse hurts our children the most.

Under the current law, we are unprotected from thousands of unregulated chemicals, some of which are known to be toxic to our families. Since the law limits the EPA from sharing information needed to understand the risks, it’s impossible for us to know what is harmful and what is not. This also provides no incentive for the chemical industry to innovate toward safer chemicals.

This is unacceptable.

Here are the facts:

1. In 1976, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) was intended to protect people and the environment from exposure to dangerous chemicals.
2. When the law went into effect, some 62,000 chemicals escaped testing and most have remained on the market ever since.
3. Science now tells us that many of these chemicals have been linked to hormonal, reproductive and immune problems, cancer, and a plethora of environmental problems.
4. Since 1976, an additional 22,000 chemicals have been introduced without any testing for public or environmental safety.
5. These chemicals can be found in cleaning products, furniture, building materials, electronics, food and drink containers, and toys your children play with every day.

This is not a groovy law. This law does not protect our families. This law needs to change.

TELL CONGRESS TO PROTECT US FROM TOXIC CHEMICALS

This was written by MCAF’s Health Policy and Outreach Manager, Molly Rauch and Managing Editor, Ronnie Citron-Fink.

By Marcia G. Yerman

As part of the push to inform the public about how the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be moving forward on reducing carbon pollution, administrator Gina McCarthy recently took the stage at the National Press Club in Washington.

In her opening remarks, Administrator McCarthy referenced the President’s speech on climate change and reiterated that the nation’s actions would have a “profound impact on the world we leave behind for our children.”

Since the EPA has consistently been under attack – and, at the time of this posting, it is closed – Administrator McCarthy directed some of her comments to the role of the agency in protecting “pubic health and the environment.” In a not so veiled nod to those in Congress, she noted, “We have done our job by developing and using the best science available, and being transparent in our decision-making.” The latter was a response to the push back against climate change deniers and the repeated accusations that the EPA has been surreptitious in its actions.

Administrator McCarthy, who doesn’t pull any punches, stated, “Climate change caused by carbon pollution is one of the most significant public threats of our time.” She then proceeded to explain the ramifications of climate change, breaking down its effects into bite size concepts. She defined climate change as being about:

• Water—and why it must be protected
• Heat Waves and Drought—extreme weather causing wildfires, impacting food prices and supply, spreading disease through mosquitoes and ticks
• Clean Air—essential to avoid threats from pulmonary and heart diseases, allergies, and the problem of smog (ground level ozone)

Administrator McCarthy singled out smog for further clarification. She spoke of its impact on the elderly and children. She specifically underscored the environmental justice issue of how children from “lower income and urban communities are being affected by asthma disproportionately (one in ten American children have asthma).”

In presenting the EPA proposal to limit carbon pollution—the single largest source coming from new power plants—McCarthy prefaced her statistics with the observation that the regulations were a “moral obligation to the next generation that must be met.” She then delved into an outline of the proposal:

• New large natural gas-fired plants have to meet a limit of 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions per megawatt hour
• New small natural gas-fired plants have to meet a limit of 1,110 carbon dioxide per megawatt hour
• New coal plants have to meet a limit of 1,100 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt hour (Currently the average coal-fired plant emits about 1,800 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt hour)

Administrator McCarthy is being proactive about getting her agenda across through a series of speaking engagements. She appeared at the Clinton Global Initiative, and travel plans include a keynote address at the Michigan Environmental Law and Public Health Conference.

With a shutdown government, it’s time for all of our lawmakers put what is most important at stake and make a “moral obligation to the next generation.”

TELL CONGRESS TO GET BACK TO WORK AND END THE SHUTDOWN

By Moms Clean Air Force

This originally posted on EnviroNews:

Emerson Urry interviews activist and mom, Erin Brockovich — she reveals exactly what can be done at the community level to fight back against large and often irresponsible industrial polluters.

How do you advocate for clean air in your community?

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Ronnie Citron-Fink

A few months ago, I met the filmmaker of Unacceptable Levels, Ed Brown. Since our meeting, I’ve been trying to figure out why he left such a indelible impression on me. I finally came up with these 3 reasons:

1. Ed told me a story I could personally relate to. It’s one that is all too common for pregnant women.
2. Ed asked questions that we should be asking every single day because “You may not feel sick until it’s too late.”
3. Ed introduced me to Mariel Hemingway.

1. Ed’s Story

After Ed’s wife miscarried for the second time, he became acutely aware of his family’s environmental exposure to toxic chemicals. His suspicions were further confirmed when he read a study that found that more than 200 industrial chemicals make their way into pregnant women. Ed’s questioning led to an investigation to protect his family and yours. Unacceptable Levels tells Ed’s story, and the story of 78 environmental experts and health advocates from around the country that want you to know why we need strong toxic regulations.

2. Ed’s Questions

• Who is profiting from the products and food our family ingests?
• How can we get an unbiased picture of the health impacts?
• Can we shop our way out of this problem?
• Can we innovate our way to safer products?
• As individuals, and collectively, how can we bring about healthy change?

3. Mariel Hemingway

Not only has Mariel lent her celebrity status (along with an impressive list of celebs) to the film and screenings, she is a healthy living advocate mom. I enjoyed meeting Mariel and experience her genuine concern and passion for toxic chemical reform: “Unacceptable Levels is a hugely important film…Sadly, most Americans are misinformed about the toxic chemicals we are being exposed to 24 hours a day. These toxins are making us sick and quite simply our lives are being threatened.”

Moms Clean Air Force has joined forces with Unacceptable Levels to bring screenings of the film to our members and beyond. We invite you to join us at these MCAF hosted events!

Ann Arbor, MI
October 16, 2013
7:00 PM
Michigan Theater
603 East Liberty St. Ann Arbor, MI 48104

http://www.tugg.com/venues/329

Cleveland, OH
October 21, 2013
7:00 PM
Cleveland Cinemas, Capitol Theater
390 West 65th St.  Cleveland, OH 44102

http://www.tugg.com/events/5600

Cherry Hill, NJ
November 4, 2013
7:00 PM
AMC Loews Cherry Hill
2121 Route 38  Cherry Hill, NJ 08002

http://www.tugg.com/events/5727

Evansville, IN
November 4, 2013
7:00 PM
AMC Evansville
5600 Pearl Dr.  Evansville, IN 47712

http://www.tugg.com/events/5715

Philadelphia, PA
November 6, 2013
7:30 PM
Landmark Ritz at the Bourse
400 Ranstead St. Philadelphia, PA 19106

http://www.tugg.com/events/5558

MORE HERE

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION

By Laura Michelle Burns

As a biologist and a mom, I don’t take the ecosystem for granted. It’s a delicate balance, and I remind friends and family that we cannot pollute the air around us and expect to  outlive the consequences. We will suffer. Our children will suffer.

In the last decade and a half, the number of heavy precipitation events have increased by 30 percent. The rising temperature on the Earth’s surface contributes to an increase in disease. As the climate on Earth changes, the atmosphere gets hotter and holds more water vapor. The increase in the water vapor leads to  intense downpours that result in flooding.

If history continues in this manner, temperatures will keep rising and the number of extreme weather events will continue to put our economy, our health and our livelihood at risk.

Remember soot? Air pollution? Particulates? These tiny particles (solid or liquid) are suspended in our air. They are called aerosols and are the result of the combustion of fossil fuels, industrial or agricultural processes, and the burning of fields and forests. If you’ve read the Moms Clean Air Force blog, you’d understand the direct impact these aerosol particulates have on our children’s health. But here’s what you may not know: the aerosol particles can either reflect the sun’s light back into space or absorb the solar radiation. Through these interactions, we found these minute particles impact chemical interactions within the cloud formations that actually have a hand in the intensity of our rains.

Clean Air Clouds vs. Polluted Air Clouds

In cleaner air, clouds form rain droplets that collide and form larger droplets before they precipitate. In polluted air, the droplets are too small so they are not released immediately. As the rain builds up in the clouds, it freezes and can cause ice or hail. As these clouds are freezing, energy also builds up within the height of the cloud that releases the torrential rains. In areas where the air is heavily polluted, rain clouds don’t build up enough rain and a drought can occur. Once drought season is relieved, it is often followed by heavy rains and subsequent flooding.

Flood Risks

There are the obvious risks — drowning, lost of property, and property damage. What we often forget is that while floodwaters may have receded, the air can still be unclear.

When it comes to rebuilding after a flood, there are three major categories of risk that need to be taken into consideration:

• Safety while driving: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) addresses this in their campaign, Turn Around, Don’t Drown.
• The remaining water: Municipal drinking water plants, wells and sewers can be overwhelmed during extreme downpours. This can result in raw sewage backing up into people’s homes, and street contaminants (gasoline, motor oil, etc.), pesticides and refuse flowing into local water sources.
• Mold: Anywhere water has seeped into a building and then remained stagnant, even for a short period of time, toxic mold builds up. The health hazards of mold are provided the perfect environment to grow in ceilings, flooring, walls and insulation during intense rain events.

LEARN MORE: READ AND SHARE,OUR NEW FREE EBOOK ON GLOBAL WARMING AND EXTREME WEATHER

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Moms Clean Air Force

This was written by Nicole Hernández Hammer for LatinaLista:

As a sea level rise researcher I try to better understand the impacts of sea level rise on the U.S.– fiercer storms, polluted water, and loss of land. There is a lot of information on what places will be underwater in the next 20, 40 and 80+ years, and the projections are grim.

There are also efforts underway to figure out what kind of people are most at risk: are they rich or poor? young or old?

As a Latina I am particularly interested in what the research has to say about U.S. Hispanic communities. So far, though, there is little information on what sea level rise means for us. But as I was looking at Climate Central’s list of the most vulnerable U.S. locations to sea level rise I noticed they all had something in common — I have family in these places: New York, California, North Carolina, Florida, and Texas.

Latinos at Risk

I pulled up the 2010 census report, and as you can guess, these are the same places that have the largest and/or fastest growing Hispanic communities in the country.

For example, Miami is the number one, I repeat THE NUMBER ONE, most economically vulnerable place to sea level rise, in the world. It also happens to be 70% Hispanic.

If we don’t pay attention to this issue our communities will suffer. Because of the rate of sea level rise and the severity of its consequences the immediate future of our local economies, public health and natural resources all hang in the balance.

Rising Seas, Rising Hopes

As we saw in the Presidential election, the Hispanic voice is clearly a powerful force that is shaping the future of the U.S.

Many Hispanics, like me, are first-generation immigrants and understand the sacrifices that are required when starting a new life in a new country. These are sacrifices that we gladly make to provide a better life for ourselves and our families.

But while we work to build a future, the looming threat of sea level rise is endangering what we are working so hard for. It is critical that we educate ourselves and make our voices heard on this issue.

Our leaders not only need to be aware of sea level rise but must be thinking of innovative ways to prepare us for the changes that are coming. While we all live busy lives, it requires very little of us to call or write our leaders and, of course, vote in ways that will determine what kind of future we leave for the next generation.

As Americans, making our communities resilient in the face of sea level rise may be one of the greatest contributions we make as we take our shot at the American dream.

Important Links:

UCS Sea Level Rise Information

Causes of Sea Level Rise

Climate Central

Latino vote

Nicole Hernández Hammer is a sea level researcher and the program manager for climate change research at the Florida Center for Environmental Studies at FAU. She is also a consultant for the Union of Concerned Scientists.

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Dominique Browning

I’ll tell you who is really happy about the government shutdown: Polluters. They know EPA cannot move forward on the historic — and urgent — rules to cut carbon pollution. With 94% of EPA employees out of work, none of our Clean Air rules can be enforced.

The shutdown has put moms and dads all over the country out of work. And not getting a paycheck adds serious stress to a family’s life. Moms can’t pay mortgages. Dads can’t pay bills. Kids can’t go to government funded-preschool. This is an insane way to run our government. And we are holding our children’s futures hostage.

TELL CONGRESS TO GET BACK TO WORK AND END THE SHUTDOWN

By Moms Clean Air Force

In September, the Obama Administration announced its first steps to reduce carbon pollution from power plants. The EPA will soon hold hearings in various cities at which the public can comment.

For decades, public participation has become a regular and important part of how new laws are carried out. Since no hearings are scheduled in North Carolina, communities around the state are holding “Citizens’ Hearings” where all public comments will be recorded and sent to the agency as official public record. Clean Air Carolina and NC Conservation Network are hosting the Charlotte Citizens’ Hearing on Tuesday, October 15 to allow area residents the opportunity to provide oral testimony on the new rule.

Charlotte Citizens’ Hearing
October 15, 2013 – 6:00 p.m. – 7:30 p.m.
Caldwell Presbyterian Memorial Church
1609 East 5th Street
Charlotte, NC 28204

RSVP today and let us know you’re coming: http://tinyurl.com/CarbonHearing.

Cleaning up power plant pollution will result in better air quality, healthier communities and a major reduction in climate changing pollution. Just last week, the world’s top climate experts announced an upper limit on carbon emissions that they warn we cannot pass if we are to avoid the most dangerous effects of a warming planet. Join us for the Charlotte Citizens’ Hearing to show your support for strong carbon rules on new and existing power plants! See below for Citizens’ Hearings scheduled in other NC cities.

Asheville Citizens’ Hearing
Tuesday, October 29, 5:30 pm – 7:30 pm
The Cathedral of All Souls – 9 Swan Street – Biltmore Village – Asheville, NC 28803

Click here for more details on this event: http://bit.ly/C02hearing.

Durham Citizens’ Hearing
October 29, 2013 – 6:00 p.m. – 7:30 p.m.
Durham Main Library
300 N. Roxboro St, 3rd Floor conference room, Durham NC

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Moms Clean Air Force

This guest post was written by Margaret Roach for A Way To Garden:

“Where are the monarch butterflies this year?” One of many recent emails on the topic asked me. Headlines about monarch decline seem to confirm gardeners’ observations: Populations of the once-familiar orange-and-black creatures are not what they were. What’s going on, and how bad is it? Is there anything we can do? I invited conservation biologist Dr. Karen Oberhauser, a University of Minnesota professor and leading force in its Monarch Lab, who has studied Danaus plexippus for almost 30 years, to my latest radio show to explain.

The 2013 numbers: how bad a decline? Indeed, says Oberhauser (above) the 2013 data aren’t rosy. Counts are made at various life stages, including during spring and fall migration, and the areas occupied in overwintering times (in Mexico and California) are also measured, yielding what may be the most accurate numbers on total population.

“Last year at the overwintering sites, the area occupied was at only 60 percent of its previous low,” she says. “It had been declining, but that was astonishingly low.”

The migration-monitoring program Journey North also reported lower stats this cold spring. And though the numbers are only preliminary, University of Minnesota’s Monarch Larva Monitoring Program seems to indicate that “we’re at about 20 to 30 percent of our average,” Oberhauser says, acknowledging that these drastically lower numbers might be a “new normal.” But she’s not sounding defeated, by any means.

A big positive: A lot of people are interested in monarchs. “Though it will be difficult to make up for all the habitat we’ve lost, we can make that ‘new normal’ as good as we can.” (Ways to help are father down this page.)

What going wrong for monarchs? Monarch decline is a problem with multiple causes, says Oberhauser. The three big factors: habitat loss, chemicals and changing weather with many extreme events.

• Habitat loss has resulted from land shifted to agriculture, suburban sprawl or ex-urbanization — “wherever there is Kentucky bluegrass” instead of former habitat, Oberhauser says—and other development, or even activities like mowing, such as along so many miles of highways.
• The widespread use of chemicals in agriculture and otherwise has hit monarchs two ways: Herbicides can kill off milkweeds that once sustained larvae, leading to the loss of their host plant, and insecticides (used to kill adult mosquitoes, for instance) can kill any insects (though mosquito larvicides don’t affect monarchs).
• Increasingly frequent aberrations in climate can be costly, too, whether extremes of cold, drought or other forces – especially when they occur during migration.

An endangered phenomenon: monarch migration. Even more than the butterfly itself, it’s the astonishing phenomenon of monarch migration that seems to be endangered.

“The migration really depends on a long chain of habitat, and if any links in that chain are broken, it’s very possible that we would lose the phenomenon,” says Oberhauser, who again offers a bright-ish counterpoint:

“But monarchs themselves are a very resilient or “plastic” species—meaning they have behavioral plasticity—they can basically change their behavior to be appropriate for the environment they find themselves in.”

Though monarchs are a New World species, they have found their way to Hawaii, Australia, New Zealand, Southern Spain, Portugal – very different places from where they evolved. “And when they get to a new place they just kind of do the right thing,” says Oberhauser. In Hawaii, for instance, they don’t need to migrate. In Australia, they need to migrate out of dry areas part of the year. And so on. Adaptable.

How does monarch migration work? In fall, monarchs in the northern parts of the country and into Canada are seeking nectar sources to fuel up for their flights south. They’ll fly all the way to somewhere along the California coast (if they start out West), or down into Mexico from the East, and will stay there throughout the winter.

“What they need there is a safe place that will shelter them, but can’t be too hot — which would burn up all their fat reserves,” says Oberhauser, “and it can’t be too cold, either.”

Around the middle of March, the overwintering monarchs start to leave Mexico (or California) for the journey north.  Few make it all the way back; they lay eggs along the way, in northern Mexico and the Southern U.S., and those subsequent generations eventually continue moving up the continent.  More generations are born up north in summertime, the last of which start the move southward again. A full chart on the life cycle is on this page at the Monarch Lab website, with a map and explanation also at the Monarch Joint Venture site.

How can we help monarchs? The most important ways individuals, including gardeners, can help monarch butterflies:

1. Try to make as much habitat available as possible. Unmow some of that monoculture of lawn; plant milkweed and nectar sources as part of the wilder area. (Oberhauser’s average-sized yard has 117 milkweed plants in it, for instance. It can add up, if we all help. “There’s a lot of Kentucky bluegrass out there,” she points out.)

Monarch larvae, or caterpillars, mostly eat milkweed (Asclepias), though the larvae can feed on a few other genera in what used to be in the milkweed family — but no longer are classified that way. One of the plants is Cynanchum laeve, or sand vine. Adult butterflies use various flowering plants as nectar sources, including milkweeds; eupatoriums such as boneset and Joe-Pye weed; goldenrods; asters; blazing star or Liatris; ironweed or Vernonia; many daisy-like plants and more.

• Which milkweed? To identify which milkweed (Asclepias) species are best suited to your habitat, pdf chart here.
• Using native plants: One of the Monarch Joint Venture members, called Wild Ones, has a “Wild for Monarchs” campaign, promoting native plants in people’s yards and gardens. Get more info.
• More downloads: An entire selection of free downloadable publications, including that one, can be had at this link.

2. Volunteer to be a citizen scientist in behalf of monarchs–even if you only have a few milkweeds, says Oberhauser. The more data the better. Here’s a list of all the organizations around the country. The Monarch Larva Monitoring Project, Journey North, and Project Monarch Health are possibilities. Or tag monarchs to help study their fall migration, either through Monarch Watch in eastern North America, or the Southwest Monarch Study in the west.

3. Donate to conservation organizations like the Monarch Butterfly Fund or the Monarch Joint Venture. These organizations work on monarch conservation in Mexico and the US, respectively.

Margaret Roach has been a leading garden writer for 25 years—at “Martha Stewart Living,” “Newsday,” and she is the author of three books, A Way To Garden, I Shall Have Some Peace There, and her latest, Backyard Parables. She is the creator of the popular gardening blog, A Way to Garden. Margaret hosts a public-radio show; lectures and tours, and always says no to chemicals and yes to great plants. More about Margaret HERE.

Photos courtesy of the Monarch Lab website.

 TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Dominique Browning

I’ll be blunt. My first response to the new climate report from the world’s top climate scientists was to climb into bed and pull the covers up over my head. Which I did.

While I was there I thought things over, knowing I would have to get out of bed soon enough. It was hard to breathe, anyway. The certainty in the scientific community made me ill: we are on the way to catastrophic warming—and human-made pollution is speeding us there. This is way beyond nature’s eternal cycles of warming and cooling. Climate scientists can read the chemical fingerprints of the carbon we are emitting.

Then the good news struck me. This isn’t God, changing our climate. This is us. And that is good news—because it means we can do something about our climate changing. Forty years ago we didn’t know the damage that carbon and methane pollution could cause. But now we do.

We can stop that pollution.

There is no magic bullet. No one pipeline, no one windmill will do the trick. It will take hard work on many fronts. But there is a path forward to cleaner air and a stable climate. Here are some key steps:

1. Cut emissions from fossil fuels.

It is fine to talk about banning fossil fuels, but who is willing to give up their computers and turn off the lights, right now? Wind and solar technologies are not yet able to power all of our lives—but they are ramping up quickly. Until they get there, we must be sure that the oil, gas and coal we are using does the least possible harm. Technology to cut emissions must be used—and utilities must be forced to use it. National emissions controls for coal, oil and gas are a necessity.

Our carbon emissions from coal are falling right now because we are using more natural gas. But carbon pollution hasn’t fallen far enough—and gas prices will rise, so coal isn’t disappearing. Methane emissions are rising. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas too. We are not off the hook.

2. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy has proposed cutting carbon emissions from power plants.

Cut fossil fuel subsidies. Oil and gas giants don’t need millions of dollars in taxpayer support—which they’ve been getting for a century. Time to get rid of those subsidies. They give fossil fuels an unfair advantage in the market place. So does the fact that they are not paying the price for the damage that carbon and methane pollution cause. We are.

3. Ask your Senators to propose tax reform that bans fossil fuel subsidies.

You will hear that your bills will go up because of new regulations. These are scare tactics.

Want to scare your power providers back? Ask them: As gas is so much cheaper than coal, and as they are all using so much more gas these days, why haven’t your bills gone way down? Who exactly is keeping those savings?

4. Be a demanding consumer. Know your power. And use it.

Divest where it really hurts. Why do you think oil and gas moguls are fighting every single state’s renewable energy standards? Because that’s where they’ll feel the pain: when utilities leave fossil fuels. So let’s get our utilities to divest.

We have to ramp up renewable energy research and development as if our lives depended on it. Which they do. Hug an engineer today. And create a market for new energy by demanding it.

5. Put pressure on your Governor for more wind and sun power in your energy mix.

Become as efficient as possible with the precious resources we have. Don’t waste energy. Don’t let heat and cool air leak out doors and walls and windows. Use efficient appliances.

Buy smart. Live respectfully. And pay lower bills.

There is one goal: cut fossil fuel emissions, those greenhouse gas emissions that are causing our climate to change and accelerating extreme weather events.

No. Actually, this is the goal: be good stewards of our gorgeous Earth; make sure it is livable for our children.

That makes cutting pollution sound kind of easy, doesn’t it?

So let’s all do our parts. It is the only way to be able to get out of bed, and breathe easier. It is the only way to feel hope.

TELL THE SENATE TO END TAX BREAKS FOR OIL GAS AND COAL

By Lori Popkewitz Alper

The world population is at 7 billion and it’s predicted that by the end of this year there will be one smartphone for every five people in the world. That’s a lot of phones and a lot of information literally at our fingertips.

Information is constantly changing and those of us working hard to protect the environment for ourselves and future generations need to have access to up-to-date material. Being a climate change activist can be time consuming. But…

There’s an app (or ten) for that!

The number of apps out there is staggering. With hundreds of thousands to choose from, where do we begin?

With these 10 apps you’ll be amazed at how easy it is to stay in the know when it comes to your health, and the health of the environment.  

1. Carbon Emissions Calculator for Air Travel (iOS – Free)

This app allows passengers to estimate the carbon emissions attributed to their air travel. It is simple to use – just select your origin and destination airports, specify the class of travel and number of passengers. View the carbon footprint and the distance traveled for your trip.

2. Light Bulb Finder (iOS and Android – Free)

How many apps does it take to change a light bulb? Just one! Light Bulb Finder gives you on the spot recommendations for energy-efficient bulbs that look stylish and help you save the most money. The app allows you to view bulb images, cost, savings and environmental impact.

3. Seafood Watch (iOS and Android – Free)

The Seafood Watch (created by Monterey Bay Aquarium) app allows you to sort seafood by “Best Choice,” “Good Alternative” or “Avoid” rankings. The app also highlights a list of “Super Green” seafood that’s good for you and the oceans. There are additional features like a glossary, links to seafood recipes and news, and other things of interest to all seafood lovers. The app also allows you to share the locations of restaurants and markets where you’ve found sustainable seafood.

4. Fooducate (iOS and Android – $4.99)

This app empowers food shoppers everywhere to make healthy, informed decisions while at the supermarket. Scan your food and Fooducate generates a letter grade (A, B, C, or D) for each product scanned, along with brief explanations and warnings about its nutrients and ingredients. There is also an option to enter the bar code manually. The app will recommend minimally processed, real foods which are naturally rich in nutrients and antioxidants.

5. Locavore (iOS and Android – Free)

If you’re looking for the closest farmers market selling your favorite in season produce, then Locavore is the app for you. Locavore is a great app for those searching for local, in season, organic foods in your area. The app has one-click access to thousands of healthy, seasonal recipes and other information that can be shared with your friends and family. I like how the app not only lets you know which fruits and veggies are in season-it also lets you know how long they’ll be in season.

6. EPA AirNow (iOS and Android – Free)

The AirNow mobile app provides real time air quality information that you can use to protect your health throughout the day. Just enter the zip code of your location to get the current air quality index information and air quality forecasts for ozone and pollution.

7. ClimateCounts (iOS – Free)

The Climate Counts app for iPhone rates leading companies based on their climate impact and sustainability efforts, and then gives consumers a chance to voice their concerns either by email or on social sites such as Facebook or Twitter. You can search for climate ratings either by company or industry.

8. Zimride (iOS and Android – Free)

Ridesharing apps are all the rage. Zimride is a new spin on ridesharing, using social networks to enable real connections. Once you set up a profile you are able to book a ride in your area, or post a ride of your own. Drivers can charge for rides and Zimride doesn’t take a cut. Rides seem to be reasonably priced and since profiles are linked with Facebook it’s easy to check out your potential ride companions.

9. Dirty Dozen (iOS and Android – Free)

The Dirty Dozen app is a product of The Environmental Working Group’s research and lists the 12 types of produce that are contain the most pesticides (Dirty Dozen) and the 15 (Clean 15) that can be purchased conventionally.

10. Toxic Baby App (iOS – coming summer 2014)

This app is coming soon to an iTunes store near you. Penelope Jagessar-Chaffer is the creator of the film Toxic Baby, and her new app will provide information to help keep our families safe and free of toxic chemicals.

With this type of knowledge just a tap away, there’s no denying climate change is real and you’ve got the best shot at keeping your family and the planet safe and healthy!

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Laura Michelle Burns

Coal ash wastewater.

I find it both beautiful and terrifying that our world is such a delicate balance. Yet, we as humans, have thrown it off. It’s terrifying because of what our future will be if we deny the inevitability of man-made pollution that leads to climate change. It’s beautiful because we have the tools to protect our children and grandchildren by regulating the largest source of pollution – power plants.

Did you know the Environmental Protection Agency confirmed 18 sites around the United States as sources of coal ash contamination from coal-fired power plants? That’s great, but according to the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP), these 18 sites only scratch the surface of the pollution caused by coal ash dumps.

Why should we care about coal ash? Coal ash is the hazardous waste that remains after coal is burned. The waste is then dumped into unlined ponds or mines where it can easily leach into the drinking water supplies.

Who is regulating coal ash? Last July, House bill H.R.2218 was passed to effectively preclude the regulation of coal ash. This leaves it up to individual States to determine how each would deal with the pollution. Thus, leaving our country a veritable patchwork of standards.

Does this bill protect our children from coal ash contamination? An opponent of the bill, California Democrat Henry Waxman, thinks not. He said the debate was about…

“…whether or not we are going to allow coal ash disposal sites to contaminate our water supplies and threaten human health, ‘not’ a war on coal or putting a stigma on coal ash.”

These are the health impacts from the toxic chemicals in coal ash:

• Mercury: the brain and spine of children, infants and fetuses are the most at risk.
• Chromium: inhalation can cause asthma and lung cancer; ingestion can cause stomach and intestinal ulcers, anemia and stomach cancer.
• Selenium: an excess can result in a glut of neurological effects including, but not limited to, impaired vision, paralysis and death.
• Lead: it is accepted that there is NO SAFE level of lead exposure, especially in children.
• Arsenic: inhalation or absorption through the skin can cause lung and skin cancers respectively.

Please support the EPA’s new rules that would place limits on carbon pollution from power plants.

Isn’t it beautiful to be part of the solution?

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Marcia G. Yerman

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its new report on September 27. The media and blogosphere were immediately filled with articles, comments, and push back. It’s a square dance that happens with regularity around this issue. Everybody plays their role. The debate goes on.

Unfortunately, time is running out.

Here is a simple primer on the work of the IPCC:

Since 1988, the IPCC has been compiling reports (this is the fifth) documenting the physical science behind climate change. In essence, it measures the extent and severity of global warming and its attendant impacts, and analyzes it alongside the global response to the problem.

Scientists work in tandem on the report; findings are collected based on group consensus. The science community studies articles on topics covering a continuum of subjects, including the impact of extreme weather occurrences (floods and droughts) on world poverty and hunger. The goal is to help shape international policy based on the substantiated data. The report is broken down into four components:

• The science of climate change
• Reports on the impacts of climate change
• Ways to moderate climate change
• A summation and integration of the previous three topics

The conclusions showed that there is no doubt about the reality of climate change; it is caused by human action. Directive: Immediate response is essential. Sea levels are rising, sea ice is declining, oceans are acidifying, and precipitation patterns are changing. There will be more severe floods, storms and droughts.

Since the last report in 2007, the same assertions prevailed. “Most of the global warming since 1950 has primarily been caused by human emissions of greenhouse gases.” The difference between 2007 and 2013 is that in 2007 the scientists claimed 90 to 100 percent certainty that climate change is the result of human activity. This year it was 95 to 100 percent.

Those who have acknowledged the matter of climate change pointed to the findings as a clarion for urgent action:

“The latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is an important milestone in the study of climate science. It reaffirms the overwhelming consensus that global warming is occurring and is caused by humans…We must act decisively, rise to the occasion and solve this monumental challenge.” ~ Al Gore

“This is yet another wakeup call: Those who deny the science or choose excuses over action are playing with fire. Once again, the science grows clearer, the case grows more compelling, and the costs of inaction grow beyond anything that anyone with conscience or common sense should be willing to even contemplate.” ~ Secretary of State John Kerry

“The scientists are sounding the fire alarm.  Carbon pollution is causing climate change and threatening us and future generations.  The President is sending in firefighters, but Republicans in Congress are trying to tie their hands.  Congress needs to stop listening to the big polluters and start protecting the only atmosphere we have.” ~ Senator Henry Waxman

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has stated that he wants to see the report be a catalyst for a U.N. sponsored summit resulting in a global climate agreement by late 2015, with implementation by 2020.

The drive to manage present and oncoming risks is still being dismissed by members of the United States Congress and those in the fossil fuel sector. The Competitive Enterprise Institute had an editorial out before the findings were made public. One of their top funders is the Koch Family Foundations.

Unsurprisingly, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) was quick to disseminate his opinion on the findings. Inhofe, a senior member of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee said on Friday, “Today’s release of the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Summary for Policymakers proves that the UN is more interested in advancing a political agenda than scientific integrity. The IPCC glossed over the ongoing fifteen-year pause in temperature increases and did nothing to suggest that their predictions might be wrong.  With climate change regulations expecting to cost the U.S. economy millions of jobs and between $300 billion and $400 billion in lost GDP a year, we can’t afford to act on politically charged media alarmism…To me, this all appears to be business as usual.”

It should be noted that Oil and Gas and Electric Utilities are in the top six industries contributing to Inhofe. On September 26, Inhofe filed two amendments to the Continuing Resolution:

Amendment 1997: Would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. Co-sponsors were Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sen. David Vitter (R-La.).

Amendment 1996: Would prohibit the Obama administration from participating in international climate change negotiations unless America offers an addendum to the latest IPCC report stating that anthropogenic climate change is a scientifically unproven theory.

Brad Johnson, Campaign Director for Forecast the Facts, told me that his top take away from the report was the “key consensus” that most known reserves of fossil fuel need to remain in the ground and unburned. Most for Johnson means 67 to 80 percent, and that discounts new exploration.

Risk is risk. Those who refuse to gamble with the environment will continue to be pitted against those who refuse to recognize the imminent dangers facing our planet.

If average citizens don’t get involved, we could be facing a future only a science fiction movie could envision.

UNITE FOR A STRONG PLAN TO FIGHT GLOBAL WARMING

By Moms Clean Air Force

This is a guest post written by Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper

I have often heard from my educator husband that power companies will pay for the creation and printing of textbooks so they can rewrite history about the impacts of their industry. Now it looks like the state of Pennsylvania is getting in on the act – this time possibly brainwashing middle schoolers about clean energy.

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) has announced a new program called KEEP which stands for “Keystone Energy Education Program.” The agency describes KEEP as a “series of free workshops, geared to middle school building teams” where “participants will learn about and explore energy issues.”

While I believe children as young as middle school should be thinking about the serious issues surrounding energy development, I am concerned about any political agenda being a part of the programming. And I question the ability of the PA DEP to provide good information about the most beneficial energy options for present and future generations.

Michael Krancer, who recently left the position of PA DEP Secretary, is on record questioning the level of scientific understanding and agreement regarding climate change: “There is no uniformity within the scientific community on how much the warming is occurring,” said Krancer to State Impact, “And there’s no agreement about how much is attributable to the human part of it and how much is attributable to other factors.”

E. Christopher Abruzzo, the Acting Secretary of PA DEP, is not on record as a climate change denier. In fact, he has no record on environmental issues at all. Abruzzo may be an able prosecutor (he served previously in the Attorney General’s office), but he has no environmental expertise. Abruzzo is Governor Corbett’s man at PA DEP; he remains in the role as the Governor’s Deputy Chief of Staff even as he assumes the role of Acting Secretary at PA DEP.  He was recently nominated by Corbett to assume the leadership of DEP permanently.

There are good people at PA DEP trying hard to protect Pennsylvania’s natural resources. But budget cuts have drastically reduced staffing levels, and the hands of regulators have been tied by permitting windows that don’t allow time for thoughtful consideration of environmental impacts. Individuals are afraid of losing their jobs if their decisions delay pet projects of connected corporations. And if the recent leadership at the agency is any example, I’m afraid I see the potential for KEEP to be used to indoctrinate a new generation into supporting the current administration’s short-sighted path for our energy future – reliance on shale gas.

In fact, while the DEP description of KEEP is that it will: “will focus on teaching about and tracking energy efficiency in the school building and in the homes of the community” under this heading two of the eight topics for the “full day energy workshop” are: (√) Energy extraction technologies and (√) Electricity generation technologies, including geologic resource extraction and renewable resources.” Shale gas and fracking are clearly among the priority areas of their clean energy focus.

The recent effort by the PA DEP to delete a peer reviewed paper by Dr. Robert Howarth, the David R. Atkinson Professor of Ecology and Environmental Biology at Cornell University, from a state report on how Pennsylvania will be impacted by climate is yet another example of why PA DEP’s KEEP program should be received with skepticism. Dr. Howarth’s published paper challenges the assertion that natural gas is not a significant contributor to climate change and suggests that that it could be as harmful a contributor to climate change as coal.

Education is about providing facts, science, well-rounded information and helping students to become critical thinkers with the capability to assess and analyze data. If PA DEP is not allowing its own documents to include studies with which it disagrees for political reasons, and has among its leadership climate change deniers, how can it be trusted to educate our children about energy options in a fair and balanced way?

Since the 2008-2009 fiscal year, PA DEP’s annual budget had been slashed by one-third. Rather than investing in programs for educators who are already trained and capable of creating their own energy curricula, perhaps PA DEP should invest its limited resources in enforcing our environmental protection laws and carrying out environmental protection programs. Investing in strong environmental programs would better serve the goal of safeguarding our children’s health and future.

Maya van Rossum is the Delaware Riverkeeper, the spokesperson for and leader of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (DRN), a nonprofit environmental organization and vital force in the preservation, protection, and restoration of the Delaware River Watershed. She heads a team of dedicated staff and volunteers who monitor the river throughout the Watershed’s four states and who advocate, educate, and litigate for protection, restoration, and change. Learn more at Delaware Riverkeeper.

Main Photo: No Fracking

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Dominique Browning

Here’s an intriguing angle on why the new carbon pollution rules are so important — and why we need your support.

I recently met someone I have long admired: Seth Godin. I think of him as a cultural philosopher. We talked about our work at Moms Clean Air Force, about how difficult it is to communicate the urgency to unite against the pollution causing global warming.

Seth suggested that our language could change. We shouldn’t be talking about global warming. “Global” gives us positive feelings, he argued, and so does “warming.”

Instead, we should be talking about “Atmosphere Cancer.”

When we have cancer, we don’t deny the science or avoid the problem. We fight it with everything in our power.

Climate cancer? Climate disease? I haven’t stopped thinking about his point — the mark of a thought-provoking conversation.

And just as we would at the doctor’s office, we have to focus on basics:

• Carbon is a potent greenhouse gas — a climate polluter. And it is changing our climate in dangerous ways.
• Power plants are the country’s largest source of carbon pollution, but there are absolutely no national limits on carbon pollution. That’s plain wrong.

Now we have a powerful Rx.

We can clean up. Administrator Gina McCarthy has released historic rules to limit carbon pollution from power plants. But she must hear our voices in support.

Doctors, nurses, scientists, religious leaders, business leaders — and many responsible utility owners — support these rules. Even the Supreme Court ruled that EPA has the obligation to regulate carbon pollution.

The only way to slow global warming is to cut greenhouse gas emissions. It is up to us to unite — and support Administrator McCarthy.

EPA Administrator McCarthy is a mom. She understands that the decisions we make now about how to treat climate cancer will affect all of us for the rest of our lives.

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Liza Donnelly

Our weather is changing because our CLIMATE IS CHANGING:

The Earth is heating up because gases produced from human activities—including carbon, soot and methane from burning coal, oil, and gas for fuel—are building up in the atmosphere, trapping the sun’s heat. This pollution acts like a thick blanket over our planet. We are throwing off the natural balance of our atmosphere, and raising the planet’s average temperatures. This is the “greenhouse effect.” Of course, there were catastrophic climate events in the past. But they weren’t caused by human activity.

Greenhouse gases make our planet hotter and wetter; they load the dice for megastorms, severe heat waves, fierce wildfires, and wild hurricanes and tornadoes. We are measuring more CO2 in our atmosphere, created by human activity.

What does this mean for the health of our children? Hot days and air pollution mean ripe conditions for ground-level ozone, or smog, which forms when pollutants from cars, trucks and smokestacks mix with sunshine. Ozone is a powerful oxidant that can irritate the airways, causing a burning sensation, coughing, wheezing, and shortness of breath. Ozone has been linked to a host of maladies, including premature mortality, heart failure, increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits for respiratory causes among children and adults with asthma and inflammation of the lungs.

These 3 BIG weather events affect our health:

1. Heat and mega–heat waves. These cause air-pollution problems related to higher temperatures, like ozone levels. Heat waves cause massively high air conditioning use, which only sends up more greenhouse gases and makes the problem worse.
2. Heavy rainfall. A warmer atmosphere holds more moisture, and causes more heavy rainfalls and storm surges. We’re also seeing an increase in insect born diseases carried by the bugs that thrive in moist conditions.
3. Drought. In areas of the Great Lakes, water levels are 25 inches lower than normal due to a lack of winter ice cover and the dry summer. Precipitation in the Rio Grande Basin is expected to decline by more than 2 percent at mid-century. Texas and the Southwest have been suffering from severe drought conditions. Food prices increase, as less food can grow. Increased drought is also increasing the severity and number of wild fires.

As temperatures continue to climb, our climate will worsen. It’s not too late to step off this roller coaster and make a significant impact on future climate change and its effects on our families. When governments, communities, individuals, and businesses work together to curb climate change, we can reduce the amount of heat-trapping greenhouse gas pollution released into the atmosphere and lower the risk of severe consequences.

Here are 3 things you can do right NOW:

1. Push for clean energy. Renewable energy, such as wind and solar, and alternate forms of fuel, will reduce the greenhouse gases causing climate change
2. Advocate for strong regulations. America should be leading the world in cleaning up emissions from power plants. Our children need strong laws to protect their health.
3. Join Moms Clean Air Force. Tell Washington: Listen to your mothers. PROTECT OUR PLANET—and protect our children’s futures.

PLEASE READ, AND SHARE, OUR FREE EBOOK ON GLOBAL WARMING AND EXTREME WEATHER

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Molly Rauch

My Ob/Gyn has been a port in the storm of parenthood for me. Over the years, she has talked with me about Pap smears, IUD’s, epidurals, and mammograms. She’s helped me with lactation and nutrition, hormonal imbalances and marital relations. She’s been utterly unflappable.

That’s why I was a bit surprised to note that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) appeared, in a new statement on the health effects of toxic chemicals released this week, to be slightly, well, flapped. In other words, the Ob/Gyns of the world are worried.

The powerful new statement affirms that toxic chemicals in the environment are harming our reproductive health. They are harming our fetuses and babies, and they are harming our health as women, men, mothers, and fathers.

These prestigious organizations write:

“Reducing exposure to toxic environmental agents is a critical area of intervention for obstetricians, gynecologists, and other reproductive health care professionals.”

Not just concern: intervention. They should roll up their sleeves and do all they can to reduce harmful exposures.

“Patient exposure to toxic environmental chemicals and other stressors is ubiquitous, and preconception and prenatal exposure to toxic environmental agents can have a profound and lasting effect on reproductive health across the life course.”

Profound and lasting. They are not talking about a slight pain in the, um, posterior. And, by the way, moms and dads concerned with these issues are not, for sure, hysterical “chemophobes” with unreasonable, sky-is-falling concerns about industrial chemicals. And if we are, we in the company of the 64,000 medical and nursing professionals represented by ACOG and ASRM.

“Prenatal exposure to certain chemicals has been documented to increase the risk of cancer in childhood; adult male exposure to pesticides is linked to altered semen quality, sterility, and prostate cancer; and postnatal exposure to some pesticides can interfere with all developmental stages of reproductive function in adult females, including puberty, menstruation and ovulation, fertility and fecundity, and menopause.”

Here we learn the specific, documented health effects of our under-regulated chemical industry on:

• cancer in children and adults
• infertility
• disturbance of reproductive function at all life stages

No one of any age is spared the health effects of these exposures, and because they alter our reproductive health, they threaten our children.

The scientific evidence is “robust”; the exposure to these chemicals is “ubiquitous;” and “preventing harmful environmental exposure must involve policy change.”

This means that while there are some things that individuals can do to reduce harmful exposures before and during pregnancy – according to ACOG, these include avoiding fish with high mercury levels and using BPA-free products – individual action can take us only so far in a world where chemicals land on store shelves virtually untested for reproductive health and safety.

I think I’ll bring a superhero cape to my next Ob/Gyn visit. It will look very nice over her white lab coat.

Image: Mother and Baby poster by Keith Haring via Apartment Therapy

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Moms Clean Air Force

This was written by Vickie Patton:

Even though they account for 40 percent of U.S. emissions of harmful carbon pollution, fossil fuel-fired power plants are currently subject to no national limits on the amount of such pollution they emit. Drawing on the same Clean Air Act tools it has previously used to regulate other pollutants, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is working to put in place common-sense standards for carbon pollution from new and existing power plants.

Recently, a group of state attorneys general issued a White Paper challenging EPA’s authority to establish minimum emission performance standards for carbon pollution from existing power plants under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, and to issue rigorous standards for new power plants that are based on advanced technologies such as carbon capture and storage. This attack on EPA’s well-established authority to administer the Clean Air Act is legally unfounded and a misguided attempt to obstruct urgently-needed and long-delayed limits on carbon pollution from our nation’s largest source, as examined HERE.

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS

By Moms Clean Air Force

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, Gina McCarthy released today rules for restricting carbon pollution from new power plants. These rules would mark the first federal carbon emission limits on power plants, which represented 40 percent of all energy-related emissions of greenhouse gases in 2012, according to the Energy Information Administration. Most of those emissions came from coal plants.

WATCH speech here and full text below:

Good morning, everyone.

Less than three months ago, President Obama stood outside in sweltering heat to unveil a new national plan to confront the growing threat of climate change. He delivered, in my opinion, one of the most important speeches of his Presidency. Yes, I am a little biased. But in those 45 minutes, the President laid out his vision and a plan to protect our kids and families from pollution and fight climate change. He called on agencies across the federal government – including the EPA – to take action to cut carbon pollution, protect our country from the impacts of climate change, and lead the world in this effort. He asked a question we should all ask ourselves: do we have the courage to act before it’s too late? How we answer will have a profound impact on the world we leave behind for our children.

The president called on EPA to take action, and we’ve responded. Why wouldn’t we? Our job is to protect public health and the environment. EPA is the only federal agency solely focused on delivering clean air, clean water, and safe and healthy land to American families. For more than 40 years, EPA has done its job well – with honor and distinction. We’ve done our job by developing and using the best science available, and being transparent in our decision-making. We’ve done our job by working with everyone from states to businesses and NGOs and everyone in between – to ensure we make progress that’s sensible across all regions of the country.

The overwhelming judgment of science tells us that climate change is real, human activities are fueling that change, and we must take action to avoid the most devastating consequences of climate change. We know this is not just about melting glaciers. Climate change – caused by carbon pollution – is one of the most significant public health threats of our time. That’s why EPA has been called to action. And that’s why today’s action is so important for us to talk about. Let me explain.

Climate change is about water. It’s about clean, reliable sources of drinking water. It’s about aging water and wastewater treatment facilities – that end up overstressed and flooded during extreme weather events. It’s about mudslides and storm surges from pounding rain, and sewers that back up and overflow. It’s about inadequate stormwater systems that let pollution attack sensitive ecosystems like our wetlands and estuaries – threatening fish and wildlife. It’s about all these impacts adding up, spoiling the beauty and vitality of some of our country’s most iconic water bodies – threatening the comfort, safety, and livability of our communities.

Climate change is also about heat waves and droughts. Droughts that drive up food prices and food supply, as well as threaten manufacturing operations that rely on water to run their businesses. Climate change is about wildfires. Wildfires like recent ones in the Southwest. Fires that, in 2012 alone, scorched more than nine million acres across eight states. That’s an area more than two and a half times the great state of Connecticut. Think of all the property damaged, lives lost, forests destroyed, and air pollution caused by these fires – destroying landscapes and putting communities at risk. Climate change is about the spread of disease. Warmer temperatures contribute to the rise of small creatures like mosquitoes and ticks. Their bites might not seem deadly, but they spread diseases like Lyme disease and West Nile virus – farther and wider as the climate changes.

And most importantly – climate change is about clean, healthy air for us to breathe. Carbon pollution and hotter weather can lead to longer allergy seasons, increased heat-related deaths, and direct threats to those who suffer from chronic lung and heart diseases. We also know that rising temperatures bring increased smog. Let me drill down on this one a bit.

EPA has been studying and regulating pollution that leads to ground level ozone – or smog – for decades. One thing we know for sure: when the weather gets hotter, smog gets worse, and people of all ages suffer. My guess is that most of you know someone who is affected by smog. Smog makes it harder to breathe and too many of us have health challenges that smog can make worse. Take Daniel Dolan-Laughlin for example. Daniel is a retired railroad executive from Wheaton, Illinois. He suffered from Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, COPD – a life-threatening illness that affects the lungs and respiratory system, the kind of condition that can be made worse by smog. Luckily, Daniel’s received a double lung transplant and his health has improved significantly. But last year Daniel came to EPA to tell his story. He came to make one specific ask of our agency: he asked us to act on climate change. Why? He understands how climate change leads to increased air pollution, which can make respiratory illnesses like his so much worse.

Unfortunately, Daniel’s story is all too familiar. It’s not just adults and the elderly who suffer from air pollution, so do children – especially children in lower income and urban communities. If your child doesn’t need an inhaler, then you are a very lucky parent – because one in ten children in the United States live with asthma every day. That’s right – one in ten. When it comes to health concerns, our children always come to mind. At the end of the day, that’s what this is all about. That’s why EPA cares about climate change and must take action now.

That’s why people from low-income, environmental justice communities across the nation are concerned they are so often at risk when disaster strikes. That’s why groups like MomsRising are speaking up about protecting our children from the threat of pollution and climate change. That’s why faith groups of all denominations are encouraging action. We must meet our moral obligation to the next generation – to be good stewards of our natural resources. It’s those resources that provide the foundation for our health, our well-being, and our economy.

The President’s Climate Action Plan calls on federal agencies to take steady, sensible, and pragmatic steps to cut the harmful carbon pollution that fuels our changing climate, to prepare our communities for its unavoidable impacts, while continuing to provide affordable and reliable energy for all. And that’s why I am here today. To announce that EPA is taking one of those important steps with a proposal to limit carbon pollution from new power plants.

Power plants are the single largest sources of carbon pollution. New power plants can minimize their carbon emissions by taking advantage of available modern technologies. These technologies offer them a clear path forward, today and in the long-term. Let me get into detail just a bit.

These proposed standards are the first uniform national limits on carbon pollution from new power plants. They do not apply to existing power plants. That’s worth repeating. These proposed standards are the first uniform national limits on carbon pollution from new power plants. They do not apply to existing power plants. Today’s proposal sets separate national limits for new natural gas power plants and new coal power plants. New large natural gas plants would need to meet a limit of 1,000 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour, while new small natural gas plants would need to meet a limit of 1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour. New coal plants would need to meet a limit of 1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour. Coal plants could choose to have some additional flexibility if they want to average their emissions over multiple years by meeting a somewhat tighter limit.

Some of you may remember that we proposed standards for new power plants last year. So why are we starting all over again? Well, we received extensive public comment – over two million – on the earlier proposal. We considered new data and we took a look at recent trends in the power sector. For these reasons, we decided to update the proposal.

We are confident that the carbon pollution standards are flexible and achievable. They pave a path forward for the next generation of power plants. The standards are flexible because they set different standards for different types of power plants. The standards are achievable because they’ll secure major public health and environmental protections, and they reflect the demonstrated performance of a variety of efficient, clean, homegrown technologies. Technologies that are currently entering the market and being constructed today. The standards set the stage for continued public and private investment in technologies like Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS). With these investments, technologies will eventually mature and become as common for new power plants as scrubbers have become for well-controlled plants in generation today.

If there is one thing I have learned over the course of my work in implementing the Clean Air Act, it’s that power plants have long lifespans – sometimes 60 years or more. But people are making decisions about how to build those plants today – which is one reason why we must act today. That’s what makes standards for new plants so important, and why this proposal takes full advantage of all cutting edge technologies that increase efficiency and reduce waste. As always, EPA is expecting lots of comments on this proposal. We will give each and every one thorough consideration.

With all this talk of cutting carbon pollution, you’re probably wondering – what are we doing about the pollution from existing power plants? Addressing that is an important piece of the President’s Climate Action Plan. And we are committed to act on existing plants too. However, those proposed standards are on a longer timeline. We plan to release a proposal for public comment in June of next year. So we’ve started the process already in order to meet that timeline. That process involves engaging with state and local governments, industry leaders, NGOs, labor organizations, and others who want to weigh in. We plan to be in very close consultation with states on this. We must ensure the guidance EPA proposes will be flexible enough to account for differences among states and regions.

I can promise you that EPA will follow the course the President charted in his speech in June. To get where we want to go, we must build partnerships with state, local, and community leaders. We can learn a lot from their on-going efforts to reduce carbon pollution and move toward a cleaner, more efficient electricity sector. And we hope to build on their progress.

In fact: 10 states are already participating in their own market-based programs to cut carbon pollution. More than 35 states have clean energy targets. More than 25 have set energy efficiency goals, cutting energy waste. And over 1,000 mayors across the country have signed agreements to cut carbon pollution. Clearly, states and local communities are doing their jobs as incubators for innovation. They are leading the way to cleaner, more affordable, more sustainable energy.

And they have proven that fighting climate change just makes good business sense. As the President has pointed out, more than 500 businesses – including GM and Nike – called acting on climate change, quote: “one of the great economic opportunities of the 21st century.”

We know climate change and protecting our kids from harmful pollution can’t be solved overnight. It’s going to take a broad, concerted effort from all levels of government and the private sector – as well as the international community. But make no mistake about it, EPA’s action today to address carbon pollution from new power plants is an important step forward in our clean energy journey. It’s a necessary step to address a public health challenge that we cannot afford to avoid any longer.

The good news is, we can successfully face the challenge of climate change if we work together.
We have proven time after time that setting fair Clean Air Act standards to protect public health does not cause the sky to fall. The economy does not crumble. In fact, we are already seeing our investments in clean energy pay off. Just this week, the Department of Energy released a report showing the cost of renewables dropping, while their use has grown. And last year, in 2012, the U.S. deployed almost twice as much wind as it did the year before. Working together – with input from states, communities, tribes, industry, and environmental advocates – we have grown our economy, we have driven innovation, and we have created healthier, safer, more livable communities to hand down to our children and grandchildren.

Let’s not forget – under this President’s leadership just a few years ago, we established historic fuel economy standards for passenger vehicles, saving consumers thousands of dollars at the pump. Those standards didn’t cripple the auto industry; they made it stronger and more competitive. By working arm in arm with industry, the UAW, consumer groups, environmental advocates and others, we got the job done, and we got the job done right. With the support of the auto industry, we achieved standards that will cut carbon pollution from our cars in half by 2025. And the average driver will save more than $8,000 dollars at the pump over the life of their car. Far from the auto industry collapsing – it’s thriving, creating over 300,000 jobs since the president rescued it from collapse.

Forty years of Clean Air Act history proves we can reduce pollution while at the same time creating jobs and strengthening the economy. The old rules may say we can’t protect our environment and promote economic growth at the same time, but in America, we’ve always used new technologies, we’ve used science, we’ve used research and development and discovery to make these old rules obsolete. Here in the United States, we have the knowhow, the skill, and the ingenuity we need to take on climate change. We can, and must, turn this public health and environmental challenge into an economic opportunity. As the President has reminded us, all we need is the courage to act.

For me, to muster that courage, all I have to do is look into the faces of my three precious children – Daniel, Maggie, and Julie. In the end, that’s what it’s all about. Our obligation to leave our children a world that’s as healthy and safe as the world we inherited.

Thank you very much.

TELL EPA YOU SUPPORT LIMITS ON CARBON POLLUTION FROM POWER PLANTS