Check out this video of Al Gore’s speech accepting the Nobel Peace prize in Oslo, Norway earlier this month. They are the most important words of the year.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger plans to sue the federal government over the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision to block efforts by California and other states to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases.

With this move the EPA has turned its back on the Clean Air Act and 18 governors and states representing 45% of all Americans.

Check out the Governor’s announcement:   

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/20/california.emissions/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

Post from Jeremy Symons, Executive Director, National Wildlife Federation's Global Warming Campaign, guest blogger:

Larry, at long last, the president has signed an energy bill! As you know, the energy bill President Bush signed yesterday came after the U.S. House approved it Tuesday, 314-100. This is an important moment for National Wildlife Federation and the work we have all been doing. Consider:

- In 2001, the Cheney energy task force introduced an energy plan focused on drilling and building new coal plants. You will recall Vice President Cheney's infamous statement: "Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy." As you know, I worked on the Cheney Task Force on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency before leaving and coming to National Wildlife Federation, and I can assure you that the remarkable turnaround in the White House position on fuel economy would not have happened without dramatic transformation of public opinion and the political landscape. The list of issues where this White House had made a 180 degree turnaround over the past 7 years is very short indeed.

- 314 House members supported this energy bill. In 2005, only 177 House members supported Rep. Markey's CAFE proposal, which was very similar to what the president will sign.

- 86 Senators supported this energy bill in final form. In 2005, only 28 Senators supported a CAFE amendment by Sen. Durbin that was similar to this bill.

This transformation bodes well for our efforts to get bold, comprehensive measures on climate change, like the Lieberman-Warner bill, enacted. But the successful efforts of some senators to block key provisions last week, and the lengthy process to deliver this bill, warn that we still have many hurdles ahead.

FYI, here’s the link to my interview on The News Hour with Jim Lehrer on Tuesday talking about the energy bill.

http://www-tc.pbs.org/newshour/rss/media/2007/12/18/20071218_fuel28.mp3

A few years ago, we invited some urban children to visit a remote natural area for an "owl watch."  As night fell, many of the children got their first glimpse of a myriad of bright stars set in a clear black sky. In the city, urban haze and "scatter-light" had been blocking their view of the heavens.

In much the same way, contemporary television "news" is creating scatter-light and haze that masks the vivid realities of the climate crisis. Shallow and misdirected news coverage is preventing many Americans from seeing the alarming dangers that are just around the turn.

On September 7, 2006, researcher Katie Walter, leading a joint U.S.-Russian team of scientists, published an important paper in the science journal Nature warning that melting permafrost in Siberia, covering more than 10 million square kilometers of Russia, is releasing five times the amount of methane previously estimated by scientists. Walter compared the melting Siberian permafrost to "a time bomb waiting to go off" threatening the world’s climate. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, 21 times more damaging than carbon dioxide.

Since there are 70 to 80 billion tons of methane sitting under the permafrost, you would think this finding was newsworthy. In fact, Radio Free Europe and the BBC thought it was; both gave it extensive coverage. But in the United States, on the very same day, rather than reporting on Walter’s work, 42 network satellite trucks gathered in front of the Boulder, Colorado, district attorney’s office to get the latest details of Jon Benét Ramsey’s warped admirer.

A second example of the profound failure of American news occurred on December 12, 2007, when Wieslaw Maslowski, a research professor at the Naval Postgraduate School, told a large gathering at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco that the Arctic will be ice-free sometime during the summer of 2013. Based on his analysis, Maslowski warned that the Arctic melt is 100 years ahead of earlier predictions and will change weather patterns all over the world. This stunning news should have been covered by CNN, which recently aired a special report accusing Al Gore of overstating the climate crisis. But Maslowski’s report wasn’t covered by CNN—or any of the other U.S. networks.

Again, last December, U.S. television failed to cover important moments at the Bali Climate Conference, where world leaders were seeking solutions to the global warming crisis. On December 15, in the absence of media lights, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky did everything possible to block progress on a process to establish a new climate agreement involving every nation, including the United States and China. Even the final watered-down language offered by much of the rest of the world at the conference was initially rejected by the U.S. delegation. An email sent by Peter Riggs, Director of the Forum on Democracy and Trade, recorded one of the saddest moments in American international relations: "Then occurred one of the most remarkable sounds that has perhaps ever been heard in the annals of international diplomacy—like a collective global groan—descending then to a murmur, then increasing in volume to a full-throated expression of rage and anger and booing and jeering, lasting for a full minute." Moments later, the Papua New Guinea representative stood up and said: "If you're [the United States] not willing to lead, please get out of the way."

The Society of Professional Journalists believes that "public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy." If that is so, can justice, or democracy for that matter, be secure in a media world where public enlightenment has been supplanted by the superficial? Until the television media quits distracting us with entertainment masquerading as news, Americans will not wake up to the urgency of global warming.

You can help. Start by thanking reporters such as Heidi Cullen, the Weather Channel’s climate expert, for sound analysis on global warming. Challenge the rest of the media to step it up too. And demand that Congress restore greater oversight of the publicly owned airwaves to ensure the media are being operating fairly and in our interests. The cynics suggest that we will not address global warming until it interferes with our television reception. Let’s prove them wrong.

As climate negotiations come to a close in Bali, it’s clear that U.S. progress to confront global warming will come from Congress. More and more, the Bush administration is irrelevant in global efforts to confront the climate emergency. Case in point – today’s story in the Washington Post quoting chief U.S. negotiator Harlan Watson telling someone at the meeting that he was doing the country a favor by resisting mandatory emissions targets.

Doing us a favor? Is he kidding?

It gets better – at a news conference on Monday Watson had this to say:

Question:

Dr. Watson:

So, the U.S. should not support a global agreement to confront climate change until Turkey does?

Thankfully, a prominent American attended the Bali negotiations and spoke the truth about U.S. engagement in a global climate agreement. Former Vice President Al Gore, fresh from picking up his Nobel Peace Prize, spoke to the conference and called a spade a spade, noting that "my own country, the United States, is principally responsible for obstructing progress here."

Although the administration tried to block action, the rest of the world signaled it is prepared to move to cut emissions of global warming pollution before the consequences become unstoppable.

In the U.S., Congress is now in the driver’s seat on climate progress, while the White House sits at the side of the road. It’s up to the U.S. Congress to pass mandatory cap and trade legislation as quickly as possible.

Meanwhile, the nation is about to see a comprehensive energy bill land on President Bush’s desk as early as next week. It’s been a long and bumpy road, but what we ended up with is an energy bill that helps reduce America’s oil dependency and takes an important step toward reducing global warming pollution, most notably, with the first congressional overhaul of fuel economy standards since the era of the 8-track tape player.

Unfortunately, the bill does not close $13 billion worth of tax loopholes and subsidies for the oil industry and reinvest the money in clean and renewable energy technologies. A total of 40 Senators blocked the bill, forcing Senate leaders to jettison the tax provisions.

Oil companies have given $8 million to Senators over the past four years. The action by these 40 Senators proved they have gotten their money’s worth: $1,600 in tax breaks for every dollar the oil industry has spent in campaign contributions. A breakdown of oil and gas company contributions to the 40 senators who blocked a measure to rollback oil company giveaways is available at nwf.org/news.

The energy bill is an important step, but the work of the U.S. Senate on global warming is unfinished. The Senate should quickly build on this measure and take up comprehensive legislation that tackles global warming head-on. We must start now and put ourselves on track to reduce pollution by two percent each and every year, ultimately cutting pollution by 80 percent by mid-century. We can do that. The recent Senate Environment Committee victory to approve the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act is another sign that Congress is ready to do more on global warming.

Check out Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Al Gore’s presentation yesterday in Bali, Indonesia at the climate talks. He speaks to the important role of international treaty negotiations and domestic action in solving the climate crisis.

Here is another update from National Wildlife Federation staffer Barbara Bramble who is in Bali, Indonesia at the climate talks. I was especially touched by the story of Almir Surui, the indigenous leader of one of the Amazonian tribes, who is experiencing climate change in his region. "I feel like I’m being asked to pay the restaurant bill but I didn’t eat the duck," he said.

Dec 13, Bali Indonesia - Thursday night, very late

We’re trying to get some sleep before the real battle begins to finalize some sort of document to come from Bali. The negotiations are still going on now (midnight) and will resume tomorrow, perhaps going all night on Friday. This seems to be traditional, but not very adult behavior!

Meanwhile, Brazil yesterday made a major offer to the world – they fleshed out their ideas on how the avoided deforestation fund they have been talking about would actually work. They are offering is to take a "baseline" national deforestation rate (that is the word that most developing countries had refused to utter in public up til now) calculated as the average forest loss over the last 10 years. (Keep in mind that this includes the last 3 years, which already is a big reduction from the bad old days.) They will then set a target to reduce deforestation below that level over time, toward an eventual goal of zero. For the first 5 years, they have calculated their baseline at 1.95 million hectares per year. They have calculated the carbon dioxide equivalent per hectare at 100 tons, which is very conservative. For each year, they would calculate the real deforestation rate, after the figures are in, and compare it to the 1.95 million hectare baseline. If they had succeeded in reducing deforestation below that figure, they would ask for donations from friendly countries and companies in the amount of $5/ton for the avoided emissions. After the first 5 year period they would recalculate the baseline, and bring it down in increments, each 5 year period. The minister said they would aim for major reductions by 2020, and eventually reach zero.

Apparently, this was well received by the other countries, though it hasn’t helped the US to budge on the major sticking point – whether to have any "range of reductions" in the Bali Roadmap. The Europeans are asking for an "indicative range" of 25-40% reductions by industrial countries below 1990 levels by 2020, because that is what the IPCC says is necessary to stay below the danger zone of 2 degrees Celsius of global warming. The US says that to include any numbers at all at this stage is to pre-judge the outcome of the next two years of negotiations.

As you may have read in AP and Reuters stories today, there was quite a confrontation between the French and Germans versus the US over this yesterday. They both said that if there isn’t a strong plan for the 2-year negotiations coming out of Bali (the "roadmap") then there isn’t any reason to have those Major Economy meetings that the Bush Administration is so fond of. They essentially threatened to boycott them if the US doesn’t allow the 25’40% range into the final document here.

I just had a quick discussion with Brice Lalonde, the head of the French delegation in our hotel garden. He seemed frankly torn about what to do as the negotiations move into the end game tomorrow. The choices are: to accept the US strong arm tactics, and leave Bali with no target zone for reductions (the 25-40 % range, mentioned above, that would be the heart of the negotiations over the next two years toward a final post 2012 agreement), or to say "no numbers no deal" and blow up the Bali session.

Well we’ll see tomorrow night. The final session may go on into the night as they hash this out.

Today, at a side event organized by IUCN I spoke on biofuels, giving an update on the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels, especially the status of work on how to calculate the GHG emissions of the feedstocks. The huge problem the scientists are finally grappling with is that biofuels can cause deforestation directly, if land is cleared to grow them, or they may cause deforestation indirectly, if increased demand for crops leads to deforestation in some other location. Depending on how you count, this deforestation may cause biodiesel to have 6 – 20 times MORE GHG emissions than regular diesel. It’s a big dilemma for all biofuels coming from developing countries. The event was organized as an interactive session, with small groups posing research questions for IUCN’s new program on biofuels. Very well attended.

I learned a great phrase from Almir Surui, the indigenous leader of one of the Amazonian tribes, today. He came from Brazil Amazon to talk about how tribes have preserved more than 20 % of the Amazon from deforestation (all other kinds of protected public lands like national parks amount to another 12% in preserved status). There are already noticeable effects of climate change on his region of the Amazon, particularly rivers that are drying up for months at a time. Since that is their main mode of transportation, it’s devastating. He said he feels like he is "being asked to pay the restaurant bill but he didn’t eat the duck."

At a reception for Mayor Bloomberg, I met one of the UK delegates to whom I had given a stress ball several days ago. He still had it in his pocket for instant use, and said it was "the best piece of marketing at this conference"!

The youth delegates gave out 200 more balls today, with fact sheets, and one was given to the Environment Minister of Norway. I wasn’t there to get a picture, but we are so proud of the Sustain US "kids".

Right now, scientists predict that we could lose one-third of all wildlife species on Earth by the year 2050. Together, we must try to ensure that this dire prediction doesn't come true!

That's why, as 2007 comes to a close, I'm requesting you do two things:

* Share your views on National Wildlife Federation’s wildlife programs for 2008 by answering a short survey. This will be a big help to me and my staff of wildlife specialists as we prepare for the upcoming year.

* Make a special year-end donation to support National Wildlife Federation’s Changing the Forecast for Wildlife campaign, an ambitious 16-month effort that seeks $35 million by the end of 2008 to help wildlife survive global warming and other threats. By the end of 2007, National Wildlife Federation hopes to raise the first $500,000 toward this goal.

I already know how important wildlife conservation is to you. Won't you please act on that belief now, when your help is most needed? Your tax-deductible donation and responses to our 2008 Wildlife Survey will go a long way toward protecting our planet and its inhabitants for the sake of our children and grandchildren.

http://online.nwf.org/site/R?i=lJ36yuVYLmaJAwGVhTjqjQ

I look forward to your reply. Thanks for standing with us at this critical moment.

As I write, global leaders are in Bali, Indonesia negotiating about how to move forward with a worldwide plan to cut global warming pollution. Former Vice President Al Gore was slated to address the meeting this morning, fresh from his acceptance speech for winning a Nobel Prize for his work to confront global warming.

The negotiations are coming down to the wire, and the world’s leading scientists have issued what amounts to a ‘two-minute warning.’ We are desperately behind and need to turn it around. But instead of coming in with a big play, the White House is full of more fumbles and sideline chatter.

National Wildlife Federation participants on the ground in Bali are hearing some disturbing news about the ‘official’ U.S. delegation. While the rest of the world is tackling global warming with the urgency it deserves, the White House continues to try to block action by persisting with outdated appeals for voluntary measures.

Let’s be clear: there is another U.S.A. in Bali that includes local, state and congressional leaders who want aggressive action to confront global warming. Americans want to leave a healthy planet for our children--we want a world where people and wildlife are not threatened by global warming. We will not sit idly by as scientists predict catastrophic flooding, heat waves and global warming refugees by the millions. We will not sit idly by as up to one-third of the world’s plant and animal life is threatened with extinction because of global warming.

The other U.S.A. is with the world in Bali. Despite a cold shoulder from the White House, delegates in Bali should know that from coast to coast, Americans are responding to the urgent need to reduce global warming pollution.

While other nations are moving forward in Bali, the momentum for U.S. action is in Congress. After years of blocking international and domestic efforts to confront global warming, the White House finds itself increasingly isolated and irrelevant in Bali.

In the fight against global warming, the science is clear: the path to avoid catastrophic climate change starts with firm limits on global warming pollution. We cannot afford to lose momentum in the international arena because the White House is out of step with the rest of America and the world. The Other U.S.A. is committed to ensuring our country moves from being a global laggard to being a global leader in reducing global warming. We have a moral responsibility to do everything we can to reduce global warming pollution. We must do what’s right for America and what’s right for the world.

Here’s another update from the international climate negotiations underway this week in Bali, Indonesia. It was written by Barbara Bramble, on staff here at National Wildlife Federation and who is attending the negotiations. The "stress balls" she’s referring to carry the message to the delegates and other participants that millions of Americans are moving beyond the current White House and stand with the negotiators that are serious about tacking the climate crisis now.

(Dec. 11) On Monday Katrina and I started giving out the anti-stress balls. I first tried hanging around the entrance of the press conference venue, and did get some takers, but most of the media guys are running off to write stories – and the ones with cameras don’t have an extra hand to take the balls! I had lots better luck with delegates. Especially those who have been here for a week are in need of these balls, and they seem actually grateful for them, much less the message about "the other USA." Tonight, Tuesday, I crashed the meeting of the small island countries, the ones who will be drowned by climate change. They loved them, and said they would read all our fact sheets.

The BEST thing we did with the balls was to let some of the youth representatives connected with SustainUS give them out. They stand near the entrance or exit of the plenary meetings, and give them to negotiators. The "kids" need a way to feel useful, and this is an easy avenue for them to meet delegates and start a conversation.

Also on Monday, Environmental Defense and NWF put together a crash press conference to rebut claims by the World Bank that they were really helping to avoid climate change. In fact, their fossil fuel lending has gone UP not down, and remains over 75% of their energy portfolio. I can’t send the full text of the press statement due to technical glitches, but the gist of it is that the Bank should put its money where its mouth is. New figures analyzing the Bank’s lending since 2001, which my intern David McArthur and I put together over the last couple of months, were central to the presentation.

Katrina’s summary of the destructive attempts by the US to derail these talks into useless blather is bad enough, but after she left, about midnight on Tuesday night, the US torpedoed consensus on adding a crucial new topic -- reduction of tropical deforestation -- to the agreement. They did it by demanding insertion of three little words, "land use within," which, trust me, are code for making an agreement impossible. They know people in the US won’t get it, so they feel safe from attack. Their subversion of these talks is deliberate, and cynical, and completely opaque to the folks back home.

Sunday, while some of our colleagues actually got to the beach, I spent the whole day in another meeting!! Luckily it was not in the convention center or impersonal hotel, but in a simply made thatched roof village retreat center up in the hills among the rice paddies. Just the place for contemplating what could be done to un-stick the international negotiations about deforestation. The Yale School of Forestry called together a number of experts, to form a new project in their series of deliberations under what they call The Forest Dialogue. The group was asked to help scope out a work program aimed at the climate change talks, and the anticipated problems over the next two years to come up with the post 2012 agreement. The participants decided that there were several issues that a Yale-mediated group could tackle that would be useful contributions. The goal is to help government negotiators understand the key drivers of deforestation, and what is needed to reduce that source of emissions. The mix of participants was very interesting – from World Bank, the Swiss government, the head of the French delegation here, Weyerhauser and International Paper, some carbon traders, to Greenpeace and yours truly.

What we did agree on was that what is happening to tropical forests is not bad forest policy – it’s bad agriculture, energy, transportation and employment policy. Much of the conversion of forests is actually legal, approved by some government agency, to allow the huge agriculture projects and plantations, usually to produce something for export to folks like us. Other causes are illegal timber cutting, as well as a lack of safety nets for the poor, which causes desperate people to continue the relentless slash and burn pock- marking of forests to make small fields to feed their families. And until governments are able or willing to act with cohesion to change these deforestation drivers, the destruction will continue.