Do you think this is.
Maybe the ego shot.
Okay.
Welcome to Radio Eco shock this week,
we're going to investigate attempts by the fossil fuel industry to
capture otherwise green thinking ports in the Pacific Northwest of
the United States and Canada to export carbon to Asia.
It's a battle you hardly hear about citizens are lining up against
huge corporations with huge money to fight off giant coal ports
liquefied natural gas ports even propane ports if we commit to
that infrastructure we commit to devastating climate change,
not to mention the explosive toxic and polluting impacts of these
big projects on the Pacific coast.
It's species and its people will first hear from activist Kevin
Walsh book reporting from Vancouver,
Canada and then from green radio host and activist Daphne why from
Portland,
Oregon.
I'll wrap up with some new science presented at a Harvard
University research talk Dr. James Anderson presents why climate
change is coming,
much faster than anyone thought possible and why it cannot be
reversed its eco shocking radio I'm Alex Smith let's roll.
Multinational corporations would like to turn the gorgeous port of
Vancouver,
Canada into another fossil fuel colony after call port proposals
were blocked by a public outcry in the American Pacific Northwest
they wanted to call out to Asia through Vancouver there's an
active proposal to steer dirty tar sands oil into hundreds of
tankers through Vancouver's scenic inlets even liquid natural gas
is trying to use Vancouver as an outlet we've reached activist
Kevin wash broken Vancouver he's part of the group voters taking
action on climate change or veto back Kevin welcome to Radio Rico
shock.
I think to be here.
Let's talk about call how big is the export business from
Vancouver.
Well,
right now we have to fully functioning courts one in North
Vancouver internal with which exports exclusively be seen course
in the coup these and then Wes short and so which is the biggest
coal in Canada and depending on you know who was exporting more
it's often the biggest of the business.
Call for North America Neptune exports around you know they export
around 6 million tons of call the year there,
they're trying to expand that to larger large volumes sure exports
in the order 30 to 33 million tons of call the year and about
about 8 million tons of that call is US thermal coal from the
Tiber River Basin.
While so they truck at all or would they train at all the way up
from Wyoming.
I guess it is.
It is in there.
So it comes on Warren Buffett's be NSF railroad up through semi
White Rock Crescent Beach all on the water through there and then
up through around Monday and over 2 cops who were shorter.
Why to using American call for.
Well,
that's,
that's a good question their hair.
They were plans there were plans for 6 coal ports on the US West
Coast is recently you know 3 or 4 years ago.
Yet,
although 2 of those projects have either been completely have been
rejected or abandoned.
And the last 2.
The one in Oregon on the Columbia River faces serious difficulties
because it's failed to receive keep the last permanent through the
last project and the largest at Cherry Point in Washington.
So just south of the border.
I'm also faces serious opposition,
including from the Lonnie nation which is that right.
We reject this year after the so public outcry public opposition
and really strong committee organizing in the state has stopped
all these projects.
So that leaves DC.
You know it's sort of the backdoor.
But the dirty doormat for US call on its way to Asia and so right
now there there.
They have been exporting this 7 million tons a year for some time
70 million tons by way of comparison the the Cherry Point
corporate proposal a delegation would be about 48 million tons of
call here and there is this new proposal to build a brand new coal
port on the fridge river in Surrey export exclusively American
call 4 million times now,
probably more in the future.
Great.
So what problems do Coltrane polls for local communities.
Well,
yeah,
that's a,
that's a good point you because in a specially NBC and in Metro
they could because the other support authority that has,
you know it's a federal agency.
It's,
it's sort of,
almost like a Crown corporation.
It's also regulator it has absolute power over decision making on
Port Lands and that's by land basically all along the waterline in
Metro Vancouver so they can approve a coal port but they take no
responsibility for the external impacts that generates in the when
you're mentioning now is key Coltrane so-called trains going to
communities.
You know they're extremely loud and they often travel at night and
the noise levels in these things are over 100 decibels when the
but the way things are going and that exceeds you know.
The World Health Organization says nighttime noise levels should
be below 30 decibels for for young people from the elderly for the
SEC others noisy also vibration and you know that there's problems
and White Rock with the the cliff faces slumping because of the
vibration.
There's also a lot of concern over called us,
do you know we don't know how much called us is lost in these
trains and we don't know what the health impacts of law term
exposure to low levels of particular are from the dust.
So that's an issue.
The biggest one,
the biggest concerns a diesel exhaust.
We know,
diesel exhaust is a carcinogen and if a particular discrimination
and trains run you know within a climate of a number of schools
and daycare senior centers,
they're already running now and the planet it run more them so
people are rightly concerned about always look.
How have activist raised Vancouver's dirty coal profile in the
media there.
Yeah,
it's been,
it's been increasing process.
You know it well and in the fall of 2012 a community member in
Surrey told me about these 2 proposals for the expansion at
Neptune and the new call for answer it for his 3 dogs and when I
look at the numbers,
if you added up all the proposed capacity if all of that call is
exported.
It will be more global warming pollution,
then you know the Northern Gateway pipeline.
It's a huge,
huge issue,
but it's all piecemeal and it was under the radar.
So over the past 2.5 years we've managed to raise the profile
immensely our organization and group based in Surrey called even
call in dog within this year than others it it's process of
working with local governments one by one,
getting them on board about the issues having them caller put
forward motions calling for you know proper public assessment or
health risk assessments of these projects and we've actually
presented before Metro Vancouver and the region eventually opposed
this Surrey outright various House leaders you know climate
scientists leaders have all come out saying their post in this for
everything from the BC nurses' union to you then see credit union
to the fishermen's union too you know to groups of said this is a
bad idea.
So you know,
we've held various rallies and events and we've presented at the
Port Authority AGM and it's,
it's really a simple issue,
you know we're saying the Port Authority can't make decisions that
affect our future as a region without including Arsenal's decision
and they're an extremely arrogant and remote organization so that
you know that the contrast is is so stark that I think the media
understand this in the broader public gets that you know you can't
do you think this anymore it's it's you now in the 19th century
may not you know captains of industry where we're,
we're a democratic society.
You know,
NASA scientist James Hansen famously was arrested protesting
mountaintop removal for coal,
but in Vancouver I was tracked east Simon Fraser University
professor and world energy expert marked a card was arrested
blocking a coal train.
So it sounds like you are getting significant by in there.
Yeah,
it's a pretty compelling story because it's a very stark one you
know we know that we need to radically reduce the use of fossil
fuels to avoid dangerous climate change,
and it's the one study after another is coming out saying that you
know we could probably burn a bit more.
The oil and bit more a gas.
But we absolutely can't burn more coal.
You know 80% or more remain on the ground.
If women avoid blowing past any sort of faith thresholds for
climate change and if that's the case and I and I believe it's
true bits,
and I mean I've read,
then there is simply no valid argument for building a new Cold War
anywhere in the world could when she it they're gonna want you
that race.
So it's very black and white from you know many things are in life
, but this is very black and white.
A new Cold War in Surrey.
It's a bad idea.
US thermal coal exports through measuring Hoover is a bad idea and
it's something that we're standing up and saying no to thing I
don't think this is right.
Trying to stop fossil fuel exports is like playing the game
whack-a-mole you find one project,
then another one pops up like the recent proposal to ship out
liquid natural gas via the historic Fraser River tell us what's
happening there.
Well,
that's another at another interesting thing,
I mean you know it,
what's kind of most interesting about this,
you know,
I guess I should say most frustrating is that there's no,
there's no real effort by government to make people aware of these
things you know I literally stumbled across this proposal because
I was on the BBC if I'm an assessment project or office website,
and there's a new proposal recently posted 4 from this US company
Westpac midstream to build an LNG terminal on the afraid and if
you know where to look if you go there,
you can see that and you can make comment but if you don't know.
You know I gonna find out and the government doesn't go along the
Fraser and you know put up things on billboards or or on telephone
poles and say,
are you concerned about this.
The federal government has given us from you know this so that
this when they realize the certain size they have to let the BBC
in federal government's now and the government have to decide to
do an assessment or not so auto.
You know it's wisdom on May said okay will accept comments from
the public until June 11 to help us decide if we should even do an
assessment or not,
and furthermore if we should substitute the provincial assessment
for the federal one.
So if you didn't go to the sea.
If they see a website.
The Canadian run of 72 website and see that notice you would never
even known that there is a comment period.
It's very frustrating because you know he's a big things and we
all need to have a say so ways to back up to the proposal.
This is a plan for a brand new LNG terminal on the Fraser River in
Delta BC next in the cement plants Federer across the river and
just up just upstream from if you know Richmond this sort of all
water mania and a big movie complex and all that sort of stuff.
It would see 120 LNG tankers a year and 90 L&G barges here and
going up and down the Fraser River now in comparison.
Some people are somewhat more aware of this proposal for wood
fiber LNG in squalor should have a lot of press this proposal
Fraser will be 1.5 times as large also in comparison.
The big Petronas Pacific Energy LNG project in Prince Rupert would
be about 7 times larger,
so this is a fairly small project,
but it was they'll see a lot of LNG tankers on the river the
proponent in this to me is typical bear.
You know the project summary description and says we want a bogus
facility.
It's,
this is the footprint,
we're gonna look at an endangered plants and archeological sites
and what not right here.
But once we sell that L&G and it goes an LNG tanker it's someone
else's responsibility when I can assess those risks a crazy.
You know that's absolutely crazy and in the United States.
If you want to build an LNG terminal,
the Department of Homeland Security and the Coast Guard require
you do connect a waterway suitability assessment on the entire
tanker root out international waters to a distance of 3.5
kilometers on each side because that's how far you know I I think
that it cloud of be approaching travel and still be explosive DC
that doesn't happen,
and there is no one asking the fundamental questions.
The final question,
is it a good idea to go and LNG terminal in the face.
Really.
They just simply must look and see if this will endanger plants or
salmon or sturgeon at the site of the facility.
It's a very narrow blinkered approach to assessing these kinds of
projects.
Wait a minute you saying that a cloud can come off of one of those
tankers if they were to leak.
There we go.
3.5 kilometers possibly on either side of the river into an area
where millions of people live.
Yeah,
I know that's no okay so many backup and and quite hot.
So in the United States there there is a thing called Sandy
National Laboratory essay and DIA and they conducted a study in
the mid 2000s that.
Said,
you know,
how are we going to assess the risks from LNG tankers and and what
sort of garlands are you,
are we going to create seems so they said.
What's the worst case scenario.
Well,
the worst case scenario is you know an intentional rupture of
containment of Ellen of all the LNG vessels on a tanker from
something like a terrorist attack or an explosion.
So in that worst case scenario what hazards will be created and so
they said well within 5 kilometers.
You know,
everything would be burnt to a crisp and and after 16 and I mean
you have burn hazards and and freezing houses in these things and
he would decline over distance.
But if that cloud of LNG that is free if Allen she didn't ignite
right away as it evaporate.
Soon turns to gas before dispersing it can still be a risk of
producing a fireball up to 3.5 kilometers away,
so for that worst case scenario,
we wouldn't require that L&G proponents examine the risks all
along that 3 and half kilometer route and we want to know if there
are people living there.
If there are,
you know if they're significant infrastructure there.
If there are,
I know well,
sort of any sort of property or public health and safety risks,
because you know that in the States they say yet explicitly
examine the possibly of a terrorist attack.
You've got a look at the worst case scenario.
Don't see what could happen if one of the things went badly wrong
while and with so that that's smart to me you know you why you
wanna know what the risks are before you privy sings before or
whoever prism in Canada,
there is no such requirement and although looking at here is the
footprint of this facility.
And it's to me,
that's quite frankly because you know I am,
I am no supporter of the Harper government,
but I do know that they say that the risk of terrorist threats
Israel on our soil.
Well,
if that's the case then why you looking at the risks from
transporting an extremely volatile substance in these battles
through highly populated areas I just make sense.
Well,
Kevin washed brick.
We know there are quite a few environmentally conscious voters in
the Vancouver region do you worry though,
that your work to stop these proposals will push fossil fuels
further north along the coast to swarms or to northern ports,
like Prince Rupert or killed a man.
That's events in question.
I don't think so,
I think you know those projects in the north.
Local people they're gonna make their own assessment,
I mean I know my thoughts are in terms of the risks to the climate
from L&G interims of what groups like the CCP in the pen.
The news you have figured out but local populations are gonna
Broadway and assess.
The local rescue themselves and I and I respect their ability to
do that and their and their interest in the non-I think what's
going on here is that you know people down here are very aware
that there are these big projects proposed up north weather's L&G
you know it's been pipelines and we often don't feel like we can
have any for say,
and in this kind of future for BC,
but in fact metro Vancouver.
We really are on the front lines of the fossil fuel debate in
export debate because we have proposals for the Kinder Morgan
pipeline,
we've got a proposal for a new coal ports.
Now we have a proposal for well for the L&G Fraser and the LNG and
squeamish so people realize is that there's a lot at stake here
and they are then it's more accessible,
it's here you know you can have more to say you can get engaged in
the debate.
And you can learn more about it,
so I don't think it'll pushing the way I think there's so many
companies trying to push for so many projects at once that like
you said,
it's a bit of a lot more they're gonna pop up where they feel like
there's a possibility.
Where editor group voters taking action on climate change.
Find most of its support to young people show up just older folks
tell us about your supporters.
That's,
yeah,
it's insane.
So you know most of our work is done online,
really we we engage with the public through you know you social
media.
When we do events,
I mean we always work with other groups we do events too.
So it's,
it's hard to say who's coming from where about it really is a
cross section,
there's a lot of older concerned folks and there's also a lot of
young people we work a lot with a group called Kids for climate
action on events that,
and they'd rather their sort of a high school audience.
I think the.
I think the concern is widespread view whether it's because you're
worried about you know the local environmental whether you're
worried about your future.
There's something to be concerned about your think I guess for all
ages.
And so the tack.
What do you think other communities say in the United States or
Britain or elsewhere could learn from the way you're group has
formed and operated.
Well,
interesting.
I think you know our our whole focus is trying to create
opportunities for the public to express their concern.
The government we train connected off between climate policy and
fossil fuel exports that put climate at risk because the climate
policy discussion are often pretty abstract like the thing that's
happened recently with perhaps Harper have been saying that they
agreed to eliminate fossil fuels by 2100 well 84 years and now no
one's gonna be here is alive now and.
And that's just an absurd abstract discussion we have real
products right here right now there are threatening our climate.
So I think,
creating opportunities for the public to engage in explicit
concerns are key.
And you know we've got a lot through public commenting websites
like right now for the L&G think we've set up a website called
real LNG hearings.org and that brings together all the information
on the Fraser River LNG proposal and there's a commenting tool.
Also you can send a message directly to the federal and run a
minister,
it's easy to local government.
So my experience is that people care and they want to take action
. You know,
they may think that they don't know how or they don't know during
the time so you create an opportunity put all the information.
One place that people want to act.
I guess just empowering people,
that's the key empowering people.
Can you give us your website address or your Facebook page.
Sure.
Our website is BT ACC.org that's a website.
But the key,
we're really focusing right now and on LNG.
And so that's 3 real LNG hearings.org.
Great,
thank you so much.
I guess Kevin washed Brooke is an activist in Vancouver,
Canada.
As part of the group voters taking action on climate change.
I appreciate your time.
Kevin.
You're welcome.
Take.
We will.
You're listening to shot radio.
I don't worry.
I'm Alex meth at all their vehicle shock.org.
What is happening on the US West Coast where fossil fuel companies
raised export carbon to Asia.
Let's tune in with a long-time friend of the environment.
Daphne why for 8 years out of Washington DC,
Daphne,
host of the syndicated radio show Earth beat on the Pacifica
network her articles have been published by both mainstream and
alternative media now Japanese in Portland,
Oregon.
As the director of the climate and energy program at the Center
for sustainable economy at the same time,
she's an associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies.
Daphne.
It's so good to hear your voice again on Radio Echo shock,
welcome back.
Thanks so much.
Alex is going to be here.
You know I were just on post carbon radio on K W M are in Northern
California with.
Bing Gong and current IOS it was a wide-ranging talk I'd like in
this instance to drill down to what's happening in Portland.
The state of Oregon,
maybe the Pacific Northwest.
When it comes to transporting fossil fuels are you up for that.
I dream.
All right.
Why don't we start with Portland what battles have been fought
their recently against becoming a dirty carbon outlet.
Well,
one thing that people may not realize is that not only Portland,
Oregon.
Barry hit city.
It also happened to be one of the first cities in the first city
in the United States to put in place a climate action plan back in
the early 1990s Portland decided that it really needed to take the
climate crisis seriously an admirable,
the city had largely been ahead of the curve for the rest of the
country and who has a reputation intact was recognized by the
White House's so-called climate championships last December,
despite its reputation or perhaps in addition to that reputation.
The measure decided that it was going to be a good idea to invite
one of the biggest tar sands pipeline operators in the Canadian
out Penn Beantown Pipeline Corporation to set up shop in
Portland's harbors and they wanted to export propane from the
terminal here in Portland he welcomed them with open arms.
A lot of us began to organize cried foul and at the time of this
interview.
We seem to have one were reluctant to completely declare victory
because this corporation have bottomless pockets and is doing all
it can do you fight back but we we need to campaign both based on
both safety issues climate issues and we generated thousands of
letters and very creative involvement from a wide array of folks
here in in the city,
including Rani basically first activists and people taking over
City Council hearings and we finally got our message across and it
appears that time you know it is not going to be welcome anymore
in in the city of Portland.
We want to use this victory though not just to say no one in our
backyard,
but also to alert people to just how insane.
It is to be pushing forward with fossil fuel infrastructure in the
Pacific Northwest.
They have been the imperative that we begin to ratchet down our
overall greenhouse gas emissions.
Not only the northwest,
but globally and to draw attention to the fact that the Pacific
Northwest right now is in the crosshairs of the fossil fuel
industry.
They want to export 5 times the carbon and is now being proposed
for the Keystone XL pipeline through our reports in Oregon and
Washington is and very few people are aware of just how serious
this however it is to our economy to iron beautiful rivers and
lakes and
outside of the northwest of course hero at the norms and trying to
take on one proposal after another that comes down the pike.
So rather than just playing whack-a-mole they which is sort of
what a lot of groups have been doing it,
you stop one project popped up an unemployed we've decided to
declare a ban on all new fossil fuel infrastructure starting in
Portland and then moving out to the rest of Oregon and the rest of
the northwest and we should be getting a hearing over the coming
year by city officials around this call we want no fossil fuel
exports and no new fossil fuel infrastructure in the city.
So that's our campaign and and I think we have a pretty good
chance of winning.
Yeah,
it would be such a different story.
If you're exporting solar panels in bulk or wind machines.
Sure,
yeah,
I mean we would love to be doing something along those lines,
and in fact that's that's the vision that Portland quite action
plan today called for which is you know I get under way ahead of
the curve trying to push for by Kabul and walkable cities could
drastically reducing greenhouse gas emissions increasing public
transit.
So it just doesn't make sense.
We found that the emissions from Justice Warren propane terminal
alone over several decades would be larger than the entire city of
Portland's emissions if if our missions were to continue to go
down.
So I just didn't make sense from a climate action perspective to
be proceeding with this this terminal.
Right.
It's almost like changing your light bulbs at home but along a
coal plant to be built next door.
So as you know.
Billionaire Warren Buffet is having a hard time finding a place to
unload his call trains for shipping to China,
what have you heard about new coal ports in the Pacific Northwest
. Well,
you know,
there's been quite a few proposals all export terminals in the
Pacific Northwest and almost all of them have been defeated.
We have 2,
there are still on the table,
one in Long View Washington and one in Cherry Point:
both are for over 40 million tons of coal exports per year they
won in Cherry Point Washington is on Native American land on the
only land and they are,
they are fighting and waging a very serious battle against that
call export terminal because they argue that it would violate
their treaties and would affect their fisheries the other
proposals that have been tabled by up and down the the Columbia
River have have been withdrawn,
essentially by the investors over the past 5 years,
you may have to do with the fact that call increasingly has become
less and less profitable,
we also suspect it has something to do with the fact that these
very same terminal began to look attractive for oil exports.
Soon as we get rid of a of a coal terminal an oil terminal as
proposed,
in fact the largest oil terminal in the entire United States is
being proposed right across the river from Portland in the event
Koura Washington and that battle is now being wedged between on
the one hand,
there's any plan for a major development on the riverfront that a
lot of people are very excited to see happen with you know
condominiums and businesses ride along the river and should this
oil terminal get built there that project will not go forward.
So there's a lot of tension between those 2 different types of
development that have being proposed.
But you know,
over and over again.
These oil,
gas and coal corporations are using very sneaky tactics they'll
claim for example,
one of the ways 30 oil company managed to get the Bakken crude
managed to be exported along the Columbia River,
they got me a port,
claiming it was going to be used as a bio refinery the bio
refinery went bankrupt and there and once they had already gotten
the amended for the bio refinery they changed it to an oil
terminal so there's all sorts of tricky schemes that these
industries are using outright lies,
claiming that they are,
you know,
for example in the case of the propane terminal they claimed it
was going to be used for the women to cook with him in Asia,
we found that in fact it was on the used to be making proclaiming
and plastics and nothing to do with the alleviating the poverty
were women in in Asia.
So you know we have to be on our guard against these companies
there,
they're using every strategy they can Oregon apparently is number
3 nationally as a target for Alex funds,
that's one of the right wing anti-environmental and and climate
denialist groups that's been pushing a a very strong legislative
agenda in favor of big energy and they're going up oil you know.
So we're,
we're really fighting on all fronts here in the north.
Now going ask you about that.
I mean whenever big oil money comes into an area.
There's a chance for corruption and certainly you can woo
politicians with the ideas of more jobs and a better economy,
and eventually I wonder is it even compatible with local democracy
and and freedom to in your area to allow these companies to come
in and start working the way you're describing.
Well that's that's compared threat.
I think that's that's looming for region is you know it's yet to
potentially will change the and not just the political nature of
this region,
but you know the entire economy.
It was shaped in a completely different direction when we start
welcoming in trains and trains and terminals and refineries
suddenly start looking a lot more like Texas than Oregon both
politically and you know environmentally and that's certainly not
what a lot of people moved to the Pacific Northwest.
His experience and that the values of the northwest,
but you know we have in addition to the the traditional political
concerns.
There's also of course the concerns that Native Americans have
around preserving their trade is a concern has been without a
court and try to get these treaties upheld for Native Americans is
that in some cases if they lose their truly get weekend.
So it's a great at great risk that they go to court and try to get
these treaties upheld and that's another potential setback that
unfortunately once again.
Native Americans have an awful lot to lose in this battle.
This is Radio Eco shark with Augusta long time Green radio host
and activist Stephanie Weisz another big do you know Darfuris is
to announce massive liquid natural gas terminals.
We've got a government in British Columbia,
the got elected promising all the jobs in the money and and you
know our budget would be totally balanced once we get these LNG
plants,
which have not materialized.
Incidentally,
what about LNG in the Pacific Northwest.
Well,
that's another big battle that we're facing right now we've got 2
major pipelines being proposed just for Oregon one in southern
Oregon that they want to build its over$7
billion pipeline that they want to build through the southern part
of Oregon and then have the export terminal export LNG from coups
they Oregon and another one in northern Oregon and Washington,
Oregon and both of these projects would involved.
Of course,
massive equation land that a lot of it in private hands.
And in many cases they are claiming,
eminent domain.
You know as an argument in favor of her example 10 about$25,000
per acre,
which is way below the market value due to land borders and the
irony in this is that many of these LNG companies are actually
foreign owned and they're claiming eminent domain,
which is you know of course it's for export.
So a lot of people that I was lifting these LNG terminals are
saying,
you know,
how,
how can he possibly be using a law that was created to develop
infrastructure for people in the United States taking on land away
from us in order to facilitate the profits of foreign corporations
that are just bypassing all of our our legal structures in order
to to build this pipeline and exported it to other countries.
So there's a lot of resistance.
But again,
not with so much money on achieve all a lot of politicians are
lining up to support this,
and certainly our local paper The Oregonian seems to be
completely in the pocket of the fossil fuel industry which written
editorials saying that climate change is not a concern for
Oregonian Gennaro regularly trumpeting all the benefits of these
fossil fuel exports.
So we're in a bit of a,
you know,
in a bit of a of a war here in the northwest.
In terms of both keeping people informed about what's really
happening and and taking you know holding our elected officials
accountable.
Does the state of Oregon allow fracas.
Now it has not banned tracking this actually did come up this
year and that there wasn't a bill that originally was going to ban
for acting and then it sort of morphed into regulating tracking
and that created a huge uproar where people said no we don't want
to regulate it.
We want ban it out outcry currently there as far as I know there's
very little in the way of any sort of gas exploitable gas reserves
anywhere in Oregon but I think he would have an awfully hard time
for hacking in Oregon.
Well that's good to hear now Daphne,
I know you continue to keep track of US national policy as well.
What do you make of President Obama taking you know he talks
strongly about climate change and any approves exploration for
more fossil fuels in the fragile Arctic by Shell Oil.
You know you're getting as good as mine.
Alex I'm I'm just mystified at you know how he can not take
especially of late.
In his last 2 years in office,
where I think it's so much more freely disputed boldly about the
climate crisis and seems to be taking an awful lot of
opportunities to speak out on it.
Why he would on the one hand take these,
you know,
take these actions do for example restrict coal-fired power plant
emissions and and increase energy efficient,
fuel-efficient automobiles and then at the same time allow for
Arctic drilling and massive oil and gas chemical exports.
I suppose it may have something to do with the fact that he was
the number one recipient of BP's funds when he was running for
office.
I don't know if he's still feeling beholden to his donors.
It's really hard to understand why he why he is acting only hears
. And again on the international front.
I was disappointed.
The leaders of industrial countries,
the G7 could only promise an end to carbon emissions by the end of
this century 85 years away.
That's way too late to avoid catastrophic climate change.
What do you think.
That's right,
I mean we had a proposal that whereas the Germans and the G7 were
trying to you get indeed curb innovation of all other G7 economies
by 20-50 and the Canadians and the Japanese pushed back on
urgently and said no,
but we were sign on to do carbon the station by 2100 of course is
a non-binding agreement.
So even if it were 2050 it would be,
wouldn't be all that that exciting but 2100 it is still far out
you know past it the lifetime of any of these folks at the table
and I'm sure they felt very comfortable making this agreement and
kicking the can down the road.
The Japanese apparently are very heavily invested you know coal
fire power you know he's learned that explains their reluctance,
do you see any decrease in their investments in coal and I I I
suppose the Canadians do the tourist town are reluctant to see
decolonization any trying to do but you seem to suggest in in our
last conversation tar sands profits are plummeting as their own.
That's true.
It's just too expensive to produce the tar sands.
You need at least$60
to$70
a barrel to do it and they're only getting about 40 to 45 they
don't get world prices because the tires and requires so much work
at the refinery to get a usable product that they get a lower
price.
So they're losing some money and it,
what's happening is this massive layoffs in Alberta and I mean big
big big layoffs and the financing for these companies is getting
hard to get and their stocks,
according to one of our guests went down 70%,
so that's a big drop in their stock value as well.
Interesting.
Well,
that may be.
Let me explain why they're trying to do.
Also some of the same companies cap into the acts Gaston and
propane byproduct of that in the past have been treated as a waste
gas,
it's another revenue stream for them.
You now do you expect much concrete to come out of the pair's
climate talks later this year.
Well I'm I'm always hopeful.
Well,
I I had that they haven't been I I went to the climate
negotiations in Kyoto and I went to several others after that and
I haven't been to the last few years,
and I was just feeling very discouraged about all of the
brinksmanship and which which is what you always see it with these
conferences nobody shows their hand until long after midnight on
the final made and finally everybody's scrambling on very little
sleep to come up with an agreement.
It just seemed like you know I dream of of chess with the planets
. The fate of the planet at stake over and over again.
I got I kind of very tiresome.
This time,
you know we do how China coming to the table with an agreement
with the United States that does seem to have potentially at least
broken a logjam between the developing countries and that the
wealthy countries that we saw over and over again played out its
climate negotiations.
So it seems that the dynamics could be different enough to
potentially a shift things moving forward.
But whether we'll see the kind of truly dramatic commitments that
are needed to stabilize the climate earning trying to,
you know,
I'm not that hopeful but I I I do think to think well at least
begin to shift at this next Senate.
Fox.
You know.
Now America has elections coming up eventually,
do you expect the same rogues gallery of Republican climate
deniers to be elected again in Congress.
I think the Republicans have a very slim chances of gaining the
presidency.
I think that they have a higher likelihood of retaining control of
the south and in the house when you have somebody like Hillary
Clinton running for office.
I think you know just given her stature nationally and and
globally.
She probably stand a greater chance than any of the other
candidates they're running but a lot can happen between now and
20-16 that's my prediction at this point in time,
oil processing Bernie Sanders surprisingly gaining on Hillary
Clinton.
He is an independent and a self-proclaimed socialist.
So that's a huge surprise for the United States.
I think what it suggests,
is that people have had enough of either candidate really avoiding
the issue of income inequality and Bernie standard but there is
taking on the corporations in the banks like no other candidate is
right now.
You know I remember after the financial crash that Bernie Sanders
actually came out and described who runs America and it was
revealing he talked for hours and hours and hours on the record.
It was great stuff.
Well,
I see that scientists say.
Climate change will look very different from region to region,
and we saw that again this year in North America with a hot
exceptionally dry western a cool snow rainy east is it a big
problem that citizens experience climate change so locally and yet
the problem demands a global solution.
Well,
I mean in terms of the deserving Northwest,
one of the things that we are preparing for a which is a little
bit alarming is there.
Niger influx of climate refugees to the northwest,
city officials tell us that they're expecting you know the
population in Portland for example to increased by several hundred
thousand in the coming decades.
So I think you know Californian dried up and continues to drag.
We probably will see quite a few people moving north from
California wetter climates.
Is it problematic how climate change out with regard to I I don't
fully understand what what what what you mean by that question can
be retrained.
Well,
it's just that you know the old story about the elephant people
come up.
The elephant in one pulls the tail on says that's what an elf.
It looks like the other one grabs a new year and says that's what
the often looks like climate change is kind of like that,
you know you have people who see and experiencing so differently
right around them and yet they're supposed to all unite somehow
and demand an overall great big solution.
Well,
I mean I think that polls suggest that a majority of Americans do
think that the climate crisis.
The areas it's happening and they want to see action taken on it,
regardless of how it manifests in their region.
I think people are increasingly alarmed and are increasingly
wanting to see elected official take action.
Unfortunately our elected officials there you know largely
following the money and most of the money is with the club
brothers and the other oil companies so they're listening to them
and not to that the American people but at least at the moment you
know this is one reason why we need better campaign finance laws
in this country.
But I think what we come to the conclusion here at the Center for
a sustainable economy is that working at the city level working at
the state level,
you can get a lot more done than you can trying to work in
Washington DC things are very broken and Washington,
but you can actually affect policy at the state level,
and eventually hopefully MPs that into some sort.
National strategy.
Yeah.
That's a great point,
are you getting re-energized by regional activism on the west
coast versus the politics of living and working in Washington DC.
Oh yes,
yes.
You know and a hit lots and lots of exclamation points after that
statement I I'm so inspired by and many of the young people that
retirees so level of engagement here in the northwest around the
issue of climate change is so broad and persons here and so
energized.
It's really inspiring to see a lot of people hurt you know just
put their careers completely on hold and are doing nothing but
working on this climate crisis,
one of the people.
That's leading local 350 chapter here in Portland.
It's the former Andy who just decided this was,
this is where she needed to spend her time and energy.
I know a lot of people that have dealt with either early
retirement or living very frugally so that they can devote a
significant amount of time to working on the the fighting at the
fossil fuel industry here in Oregon.
So it's,
it's both inspiring encourages me to work even harder whereas back
in Washington,
DC.
We just feel that no matter how much you through your head against
that that wall you just keeps Nash.
You know how to go through expense and it wasn't going to budge.
But things do actually get done it Thursday.
I wonder if there's a story or experience beyond that you think
could help raise our listeners to an even greater move into
climate activism.
Well,
I mean I think the climate crisis you you know you've covered it
so well,
especially in your recent shows with climate psychologists and
others talking about the ways in which we turn away from just how
serious it is,
it cannot have that result,
but it can also when you are working in coalition with others I
what I found is that the people that end up coming out to join
this coalitions are some of the best members of our society and
mean you know just smart committed,
funny,
creative,
and these are the kinds of people that I would want to have.
By my side fighting any kind of battle.
So I encourage people that are in any way feeling defeated by this
crisis turn that sort of intention to mourn into an into an
organizing intention and to really stick out like-minded folks
because they will energize you and keep you going in the darkest
hours and a lot of us are feeling the grief around.
I know I felt it for quite some time,
but there is,
there are signs that people are really beginning to get it and I
really getting mobilized for example and working with the National
Unitarian General Assembly that's gathering in Portland and 6,000
members of the Unitarian coming from all over the United States
and they'll be focused exclusively on those climate change and
also how best to work in solidarity with native Americans in
facing down this crisis.
It's very exciting.
It feels like we are going to go back to our home communities and
really commit to respond.
In fact there is a website commit to respond and people were going
to be asked to do something along the same lines of what your last
guest asked us to do which is to mobilize towards a World War 2
type mobilization to save you know I think a lot of us recognize
if that's what's required to swim time and we need all of us to be
calling for the same thing both for our economy and for our planet
if were gonna stop this monster in time.
Here.
Our guest Washington hosted the environmental program for 8 years
on the Pacifica Radio network now she's bounced between regional
activism on the West Coast continuing watch over national and
international climate developments.
She is the director of climate and the energy program at the
Center for sustainable economy definitely where the best places to
follow your ongoing work.
Sustainable dash economy of our website and we are getting on
climate and energy program up and running.
There were very excited about a new initiative that you can see an
update on shortly called climate response.
We have a preliminary paper up there and we'll be posting a lot of
our activity on Algerian and other oil and gas and coal exports in
the Pacific Northwest,
we've hired a new political director.
You can join our activist network there,
and we were poured engaging with anyone who wants to preserve what
we call that in green line here in the Pacific Northwest them
these massive fossil fuel.
Well,
from going.
Great.
So listeners just Google center for sustainable economy or look
for links in my blog at could shock.info Daphne.
Thank you so much for joining us again,
please keep in touch as you develop more stories.
Thank you.
And one last thing it it really as websites seemed odd or will
take you right to absolutely and I do I will treat you,
right.
Activist network page.
Beautiful scene.org I'm Alex Smith reporting for Radio Eco shark.
This is Radio Eco shot made up your iPod or computer with tons of
free green audio from our website at W W W.eco shock.org that's
easy oil shock like electric shock.org.
In the short time we have left.
I'd like to pass on some quotes and notes from a deep and
important talk from climate week at Harvard University Center for
the environment,
the speakers.
Dr. James Anderson and the title is coupled feedback in the
climate structure that set the timescale for irreversible change
Arctic isotopes to stratospheric radicals.
That's quite a bit and believe me he covers a lot this talk on
April 8th 20-15 was part of a series of presentations I found this
on video.
Thanks to a tip from a radio equal shock listener and I'm so glad
I did.
The talk as Anderson tells us,
is a fairly high level.
A presentation of ongoing research into some important
developments in the climate Anderson covers a wide range of
science.
I can only get to a few points here,
for example,
research into past ages showed the stratosphere that upper level
of Earth's atmosphere above the weather was far wetter than today
, in past greenhouse ages.
The wording of the stratosphere should be happening now but until
very recently nobody knew how that could happen.
Now we do Anderson also points out a key difference between past
hothouse world and today this time around.
Humans have also injected chlorinated substances like ozone
destroying CFCs there were never there in the past ages and how
does that affect climate change as we'll hear from those opening
quote scientists are gaining new knowledge on changes we've made
that cannot be reversed,
at least not in any timescale that matters to humans here is Dr.
Anderson speaking at Harvard.
This is really research talk about 2 aspects of the climate
structure,
both of which are coupled through irreversible connective cycles
and so I'm gonna talk about experiments done 5 meters above the
surface and then experiments done 20 kilometers above the surface
and you'll see why those are linked,
but just in case I basketball over these things I want to
emphasize some points.
The first one is that this global climate structure is changing
far more rapidly than than we believe was possible even even 5
years ago and I'm gonna show some dominant examples of that the
next issue is the feedback in the climate structure because it
seeks feedback sits set the timescale for a reverse ability and
I'm gonna take a very brief tour through the climate system to
demonstrate how that functions now:
a look at the way in which developing technology provides direct
measurements for example of methane and carbon di-oxide ITA topic
Fox measurement.
Next we'll hear about how the fragile Arctic determined so much of
our weather.
Then I'm going to look at why these Cryer systems which are so
delicate because heat of fusion for waters so small that the
delicacy of of these Cryer systems in a cruel irony link into the
larger global climate structure and they exhibit inordinate
control over these global climate systems I'm I'm gonna touch very
briefly on this pale your record and as Brian talked about on on
Tuesday that the climate structure depends in in large measure on
the temperature gradient between the tropics in the polar regions
and during the EEOC,
there was a very little temperature difference between the tropics
and and and the polar regions and in that particular structure of
the stratosphere had to be wet.
There's very little
and fact.
I don't know,
Brian,
I don't think there's any possibility of having that claim a
structure without a Maurice stratosphere.
And as we'll see moisture entering the stratosphere today has a
very different connotation because it triggers catalytic cycles
involving chlorine in Bromley in that were not present during the
EEOC so also talk about you active of injection north of the
subtropical jet,
which as we saw from from Bryant brands talk is of a potential way
of transitioning from the current structure of the climate to one
in which there is a far smaller difference between in temperature
between the equator in the polar regions,
so is convicted injection of water,
it turned out to be unique over the US and it's coupled also to
any cyclonic flow over the US that that's created by the North
American monsoon.
And so we have this convicted injection into this anti cyclonic
motion,
which is a hoot demonic combination created by the dynamics.
But it has very strong good coupling into the catalytic chemical
structure of the stratosphere.
Note how Anderson stressed the point made again and again by our
guest scientist Paul Beckwith when explaining the new disruption
of weather in the northern hemisphere and that's the temperature
difference between the tropics in the polls as polar regions warm
up the difference is declining and the result is a slower and wave
your jet stream and some really strange weather for all of us in
the northern world as a side note,
Anderson explains why both the left and the right may support
further research into controversial geo engineering first he
refers to the National Research Council report on climate
engineering particularly solar radiation management.
The National Research Council just released a new report on
climate engineering particularly solar radiation management that
is being pushed actually in a bipartisan way because the right
would like to have solar radiation management so more fossil fuels
can be burned and the left believes that intruding in natural
systems like this is a very dangerous so research on the topic is
gaining bilateral support,
which is highly unusual these days.
Next we hear why James Anderson,
thinks global warming is so horribly wrong as a term to describe
the current climate shift.
All right,
so let me start with with a bias this this term global warming
applied to this problem.
It makes me shudder because 70% of the globe is covered by the
ocean,
with an average depth of 3500 meters,
and it has massive heat capacity,
so my mind most degenerate variable you can discusses mean global
temperature and it also carries a connotation of something that's
happening slow leak you know one degree centigrade per century
doesn't carry a huge amount of political imperative behind it.
It also carries the connotation that you can watch think slowly
change and if you don't like,
if you can just slow down the release of carbon dioxide and return
to the condition and nothing could be further from the truth is,
as we'll see.
So I always avoid the term and I cringe every time I hear it.
We'll never have time to get to all the great science in the stock
. But I do want you to hear this.
The next point involves these methane clatter it's either of these
beautiful structures ice cages within which nature inserts methane
produced anaerobic by decomposition of organic material and in its
and it's chirpy that's driving this entirely because it nature of
course abhors a vacuum and with stuff molecules and every possible
nook and cranny in order to engage the inclusion of
energy states and it turns out that methane 5th beautifully into
these water cages and this is ubiquitous Klatten nothing rates
contain about 3 times the chemical energy of all known fossil fuel
reserves include coal,
petroleum natural gas and they reside not only in the surface
soils of Siberia northern Alaska but also
they're ubiquitous across the ocean basins this was pulled up off
the west coast of about 100m than it is touch of magic to it and
it it ignites but the numbers as Steve,
what's the point pointed out,
are actually quite concerning.
So here we plot the CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel burning in gig
tons of carbon per year yet to convert back from CO2 but canonical
representation is and in carbon per vehicle because of that's
typically how calibrated so 1990 have about 6 again get tons of of
carbon was added to the atmosphere by fossil-fuel burning,
and that was basically a textbook number for for many many years,
but in 2000,
it started to take off and when the 2007 IPCC report came out.
These were the release than area.
This was the worst possible cases up a red wine,
and of course,
we've exceeded that of every year.
The subsequent to to 2007 but the key point is that just half a
percent of the labor while carbon in the Earth's surface soils,
of the North Slope of of Alaska and Siberia just half a percent
release rate per year gives us around 89 tons per year,
which doubles the carbon added to the atmosphere by all
fossil-fuel burning worldwide.
And so this constitutes for the next exhibit for feedback.
Anderson gives the example of a class 3 pulled up off the west
coast from a depth of about 100 meters,
that could be ignited with old match.
Well,
we didn't get to the strange way chlorinated substances playback
on other climate feedback in the atmosphere plus and this is a
spoiler alert.
Scientists have discovered a way the stratosphere can become
wetter as it did in past greenhouse worlds many many hours flying
around the world found the stratosphere has the same low amount of
water vapor.
But in a kink in the system.
A collision of weather factors over the continental United States
creates an almost unique kind of heat funnel that does inject more
water into the stratosphere.
There are several other sites like that Anderson says they have
the mechanism that will wet down the stratosphere over time,
as I say there's a huge range of cutting science in the stock by
James Anderson.
Some of it is a little difficult for the lay person to understand
, but most of it is very clear.
We learn of feedback switch make this developing climate shift
into a major geological event that cannot be reversed.
We have already gone over the climate cliff he tells us how far we
fall depends on whether we can rein in our fossil-fuel burning
emissions before they trigger much much larger carbon or methane
inputs from the previously frozen land and sea bed in the Arctic
find an easy link to this video presentation at Harvard University
April 8 2015 in my shell blog eco shock.info.
I'll also add my lengthy notes to the blog,
which includes a few links and explanations we've blown through
the time barrier again get all past programs as free MP3s from our
website at shock.org listen any time on the radio shock page on
sound cloud I'm Alex,