Tim DeChristopher is a free man. Somehow, putting an exclamation point after that sentence seems redundant. Because DeChristopher has always been free. It’s just that the federal government locked him up for two years because as an act of conscience he bid $1.8 million for oil and gas leases on public lands. He didn’t have the money, and it was felonious to say that he did.
Yesterday, he was released from the half-way house in Salt Lake City where he has served the last few months of his sentence. Before that he was in prison, where he was disciplined for sending an email with a stint in a restrictive housing (SHU). An economics major in college, DeChristopher knew he was challenging not only the federal government but the oil and gas industry’s power over it and our entire economy. They’ve made a movie about him, Bidder 70, and he’ll make his first public appearance at its release today, Earth Day. His plans call for enrollment in Harvard Divinity School, after which he plans to become a Unitarian Universalist minister. Peaceful Uprising, the environmental organization he helped found, is thriving.
We’ve run a jagged course since the first Earth Day in 1970. For a while, it seemed that the United States was determined to break its dependence on fossil fuels and clean up Earth’s atmosphere. We passed legislation to curb toxic emissions into our air and water. We bought smaller cars. We learned to recycle materials like plastics that depend on oil as a base. We harnessed energy from the sun and wind to create electricity. We pushed back our thermostats and bought more efficient light bulbs.
Many of us have changed our habits. Some of us concentrate on what we eat—little or no animal products and organic produce. Others drive more efficient cars, take public transportation, ride bicycles or walk more. Still others focus on building more energy efficient structures in which to live and do business. We may teach our children to respect the Earth. I know individuals who do all these things, and I myself do some of them. I believe they are an important part of modern spiritual practice. But our economy and our nation’s government keep steamrollering past us, and that’s a paradigm DeChristopher is trying to change.
In 1980, we elected a president who was once a spokesman for General Electric. Rather than attack the environmental movement, he scoffed at it and dismissed it as alarmist. He took down the solar panels his predecessor had erected on the White House roof. He gave the green light to larger and larger vehicles. And his administration began to dismantle the regulations that had been placed on manufacturing and business as unnecessary and even harmful to the economy.
I wish I could say that the Democrat we elected in 1992 set things straight, but that is not the case. Instead, we hoped that a burst in technological innovation would get us out of our predicament. His vice president took the planet’s precariousness far more seriously, but he was defeated when he ran for the presidency, and his efforts as a private citizen have met with mixed success.
It seems unnecessary to recount the disgraceful record dominated by oil and gas interests of the administration that followed except to say that we still do not know what the vice president who called industry officials to the White House agreed to. But the public paradigm suddenly shifted from intention to eliminate dependence on fossil fuels to reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
Yesterday, driving across a vast and haunting landscape that includes both Ute and Navajo reservations, I turned on the radio to hear an address given by Japanese Canadian scientist and environmentalist David Suzuki. Suzuki is interested in how whole societies can ignore the advice of half the living Nobel prizewinners to take drastic steps to stop climate change. He’s particularly appalled by Alberta’s decision to extract oil from its tar sands. And yet, he asked doomsayers who maintain it’s too late to save the human race to shut up. He’s hopeful that it’s not.
Right now we stand on the cusp of decisions that could further tilt Earth’s carbon dioxide balance toward toxic human levels. Our State Department still weighs approval of the Keystone Pipeline that will take dirty oil from Alberta across a vast swath of our nation to the sea. You can still register your comments here http://act.350.org/letter/kxl-sprint-day-4/?akid=3007.883890.S9-Axv&rd=1&t=1
In some states, the process known as fracking is being used to extract natural gas from below the surface that also shelters our ground water. Yet the chemicals used for this process have never been revealed and governments that permit fracking have not even required them to be listed. New York State is still considering fracking, and you can call Governor Andrew Cuomo at 518-474-8390 or 212-681-4580.
Maybe you’re not as brave as Tim DeChristopher. I know I’m not, but I am grateful for his sacrifice, and believe that private conservation is now too incremental to arrest climate change. I hope you’ll find a way to take a public stand.
Pity the poor president, the February 17 New York Times headline suggested. He must choose between alienating environmentalists or alienating Canada, one of the nation’s chief allies, when he decides whether or not to allow the Keystone Pipeline to pass through the United States on its way to refineries in the Gulf of Mexico.
The decision on the $7 billion project is being weighed by the State Department and not the Environmental Protection Agency, which does not bode well for environmental interests. Compounded with the resignation of EPA chief Lisa Jackson, a pipeline opponent, it might seem like a done deal.
But environmentalists did not walk away. The Sierra Club, granddaddy of all environmentalist groups, broke its 120 year ban on civil disobedience. About 40,000 Americans protested the pipeline in Washington on February 17, and four dozen high-profile environmentalists were arrested. Known in the environmentalist community for its propensity to compromise, the Sierra Club’s decision towards action signals an important political turn.
And although newly-confirmed Secretary of State John Kerry has reassured the Canadians that Washington will make up its mind promptly, no decision has been announced. That the president even mentioned climate change as a danger in his State of the Union Address was seen by some as hopeful.
Sierra Club President Michael Brune characterized the dilemma this way: “Whatever damage the President’s decision (to approve the pipeline) would do to the environmental movement pales in comparison to what it would do to his legacy.”
I wish he’d said “damage to the Earth,” rather than tangle himself up in Obama’s legacy. That assumes that decades or centuries from now people will be able look back upon our neglect of our home, the Earth, and wonder why we did not act with more conviction. Let’s hope history will remember that Obama took decisive measures on this and other matters in which he might take executive action, but the judgment will be shared, I think.
What if this is not just another Washington contest between competing interests? What if the Keystone Pipeline is just a huge piece of the machinery that could help render our planet uninhabitable? What if the tar sands that are being fracked to fill that pipeline are leaving behind poison that will damage their native soil and the water beneath it? What if attempts to get last drops at the bottom of the bottle of an addictive substance is going to put the planet on the path to irreversible toxicity? In New York state, the government has at least demanded further investigation of fracking practices proposed to yield gas from the earth’s crust. But that decision as well is still not taken.
In a piece called “The Five Stages of Environmental Grief” Richard Schiffman suggests that the human predicament is much like that of well-heeled passengers on the Titanic. They felt the jolt when the ship hit an iceberg but they brushed off their concerns and went back to the dance floor. The ship, says Schiffman, is still afloat, but there’s a huge gash below the water line. It’s not just the fact of global warming but the diminishing of rain forests, the heating up and acidification of the oceans, the reduction in arable land due to erosion and desertification, the loss of habitat to various species and their subsequent extinction.
The ship, Schiffman insists, is sinking and there’s lots we must do.
In Washington, there’s always the temptation to buy off ones opponents while rationalizing that direct confrontation could lead to absolute defeat. Anyone who expected an about face from the Bush-Cheney regime has been sorely disappointed by events of the last two years. It’s our job to press the urgency of issues around climate change.
Since Earth Day 1970, the League of Conservation Voters has kept close tabs on Congress, from the most progressive members to the obdurate head-in-the-sanders with its scorecard. This year, the League expressed thanks to the White House and the Senate for at least making sure that established environmental legislation was supported. (A bill mocked as the War on Lungs that would have gutted the Clean Air Act and another dubbed Oil Above All that would have supported more drilling at all costs were defeated.)
But the League was scathing about the House of Representatives.
“Perhaps the best thing that can be said about the last session of the 112th Congress is that it’s over,” says the preface to the League’s new scorecard. Nevertheless, House members in Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts and Rhode Island were singled out for praise. And those in Alabama, Alaska, Kansas, Montana North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Wyoming were ranked worst of the worst.
One bright note was the League’s observation that many newly elected Members of Congress support positive environmental legislation. To see how your representative and your senators stack up, check out the League’s scorecard, and so you know whom to praise and whom to pressure.
I’m not feeling sorry for any of our elected officials. They asked for these jobs, and if the decisions have become tougher, it makes them more, not less, important. But it’s our duty to pay attention to what’s up for a vote and support them when they take difficult positions. Unless you prefer “Nearer My God to Thee.”
The first time I visited the Mountain West was shortly after 9/11 when my partner and I made a long-planned visit to Yellowstone National Park. The golden leaves of the aspens and the cottonwoods were so radiant against the mountainside that I wanted to stop and photograph them at every turn of the road. And when people found out we were New Yorkers, we were welcomed with open arms.
Since then, we’ve travelled here more, down into the desert and up to the mountains, and I’m still awe-struck by the terrain, but the politics have taken some adjustment.
It may have seemed at first like a publicity stunt or a gift from above, but last year Coloradans at Vail and Beaver Creek mountains saw pink snow.
“When you skied a run, you turned and your tracks were pink,” Melissa Macdonald, executive director of the Eagle River Watershed, told the Vail Daily. It wasn’t to be confused with the ever-popular watermelon snow
Now that Congress has balked at bailing out the Big Three automakers, their CEOs have all gone back to Detroit, not in a Ford Expedition or a Chevy Suburban or in a Lincoln Navigator, one of which would hold them all, but on their individual jets. Even President-elect Obama expressed surprise that they came only with their hands out and without a plan. He said he hoped they’d work something up before they come back.
Random reflections on politics, the media, political activism, women's lives and spirituality, often inspired by travel, cultural events or what I read.
|<< <||> >>|