WorldSaver community untitled
NEW! Upgrade to Pro Hosting and receive Ad-Free Webtools + More!



home post read join

Recent Post

Read more

Talk to Dove before they destroy Paradise Forests Part2

See this new video :

Source : Greenpeace.com/Youtube.com

Endangered Species Act threatens Polar Bears

15 May 2008
Polar Bears on an ice shelf. Mother and cub.

Polar Bears on an ice shelf. Mother and cub.

Enlarge Image

United States — For the last three years, the US Department of Interior has been dragging its feet when it comes to protecting the polar bear. It has now finally listed the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. This might seem like a victory but there are enough exemptions in this listing to leave the polar bear unprotected against its biggest threat, global warming.

What happened?


After months of calculated delays and several lawsuits against them, brought by Greenpeace, the Natural Resources Defence Council and the Center for Biological Diversity, the Bush administration has listed the polar bear as threatened under the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA).

A threatened listing under the ESA is supposed to provide broad protection to polar bears. This includes a requirement that United States federal agencies ensure that any action carried out, authorised, or funded by the United States government will not "jeopardise the continued existence" of polar bears, or adversely modify their critical habitat.

However, the decision comes with a big catch: an exemption (technically known as a “4(d) exemption”) for global warming pollution. Global warming is the biggest threat facing polar bears and this exemption eliminates any real protection the listing could have provided for the polar bear. It specifically says federal agencies don’t need to consider the impact of global warming pollution on the polar bear. It gets worse: the listing also proposes a separate regulation that reduces the protections the polar bear would otherwise receive under the ESA.

This might look like a listing to protect the polar bear but it’s really just a way for the administration to protect the interests of the oil and gas industry, as well as get away without taking action on global warming.

What does the science say?


A decision about whether or not to list a species under the ESA is supposed to be based on the best available science. The best available, most current science on the impact of global warming on polar bears is clear: the species faces extinction because its Arctic ice habitat is melting. Sea ice melts and refreezes seasonally, but recent years have shown a smaller area of maximum sea ice in the winter. Predictions about Arctic sea ice loss have become worse with each passing year.  A few years ago, scientists were predicting the Arctic Ocean could be ice-free in summer as early as 2100, then that prediction was moved up to 2050, then 2040 and 2030.  Late last year, one leading scientist predicted the Arctic Ocean could be ice free in summer as soon as 2012. It seems clear that the pace of global warming in the Arctic is outrunning predictions and is happening faster than expected.

“I have been following this issue for quite some time, and I have seen firsthand the impacts of global warming in the Arctic. I’ve been in Alaska’s Beaufort Sea when the sea ice retreated so far offshore that a lone polar bear was stranded in open water, swimming for what little ice it could find in search of its ringed seal prey that were hundreds of miles away at the ice edge.   That bear was not long for this world, and the image haunts me every time I read another grim report about the plight of polar bears in our warming world,” said Melanie Duchin, a global warming campaigner for Greenpeace US, based in Alaska.


In 2007, the US Geological Survey predicted that by 2050, two thirds of the world’s polar bears would disappear, including all of the polar bears in the United States. Scientists are witnessing evidence that polar bears are already in real trouble. Reduced food supplies due to global warming has resulted in polar bears actually resorting to cannibalism in the north coast of Alaska and Canada. Scientists with the US Minerals Management Service documented the drowning of at least four polar bears in September 2004, when the sea ice retreated a record 160 miles off the state's northern coast. Just last week, scientists in Alaska reported that fewer polar bear yearlings are making it to maturity. The polar bear population in Western Hudson Bay of Canada has declined from approximately 1200 bears in 1987, to 1,100 bears in 1995, and then to fewer than 950 bears in 2004 due to ice loss. Arctic sea ice loss set a record low in 2007.  This year, the sea ice melt season is already shaping up to break the record set in 2007.

Polar bears and sea ice


Polar bears live only in the Arctic and are totally dependent on the sea ice for all of their essential needs, including hunting their prey. The rapid warming of the Arctic and melting of the sea ice poses a serious threat to polar bears. The polar bear could be the first mammal to lose 100 percent of its habitat to global warming.  As the ice continues to disappear, so will the polar bear. The only way to save the polar bear is to stop global warming and protect their sea ice habitat from melting away, and the only way to do that is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

Once again, the Bush administration is ignoring the science that is staring it in the face: global warming is threatening polar bears with extinction. The federal government’s press release carried the headline, “Secretary Kempthorne Announces Decision to Protect Polar Bears under Endangered Species Act,” but it’s clearly mistitled. It would have been more aptly written if it had said, “Secretary Kempthorne Announces Decision to Protect Oil and Gas Industry.”  Exempting global warming pollution caused by unabated oil and gas drilling spells doom for the polar bear, pure and simple.

For those reading this and thinking that, while saving the polar bear is a laudable goal,  what’s more important is drilling for oil, jobs and the economy, consider these facts:

  • The US will never be able to drill its way to energy independence since it has only three to four percent of global oil reserves, yet burns one-quarter of the world’s oil.
  • The Arctic is a harbinger for things to come at lower latitudes. What we see now in the Arctic – unprecedented sea ice loss and species threatened with extinction – will not be limited to the Arctic.  Serious global warming impacts and species’ extinction will accelerate in the mid-latitudes as it is in the Arctic.
  • Stalling action now means more disruption and economic cost down the line. It’s not just about polar bears and the Arctic, the entire country will benefit if the government replaces dirty sources of energy such as oil, gas and coal with cleaner, climate friendly forms of energy like solar and wind.  Conservation can go a long way toward cutting US energy needs as well.

Source : Greenpeace.com

Talk to Dove before they destroy Paradise Forests

Unilever, the makers of Dove beauty products, are buying palm oil from suppliers who destroy Indonesia's rainforests.
We've got the proof. They're causing forest destruction, species extinction and climate change.

Together we can make the company stop destroying forests for palm oil.
Join the international Dove campaign today - sign the open letter below.


UPDATE (1 May 2008): Good news! Unilever (Dove's parent company) is feeling the heat from customers
like you, and has made a positive statement. Read about it here. We'll meet with them soon to talk about
the details. For now, we need more signatures to this open letter and keep spreading the word.

Source : greenpeace.com

Global Warming Versus Planet Poisoning

by Ellen Holder (see all articles by this author)


(NaturalNews) Al Gore recently won a Nobel Prize for his documentary on global warming, “An Inconvenient Truth”. Since then, there has been much debate over whether or not Mr. Gore deserved this accolade and thus rekindled the debate over global warming in general. This seems to be the point of the movie in the first place, to focus our attention on climate change and what we can do about it. Now if only someone equally famous would put together a documentary on how synthetic chemicals are killing us and the planet.

The effects of carbon emissions from our insatiable appetite for energy may be melting the polar ice caps and endangering the polar bears, but perchlorate in our ground water is compromising the healthy function of the thyroid in both man and beast. Increasingly prescribed over the decades, synthetic hormones have also found their way into our lakes, streams and drinking water and already there are populations of frogs found with both male and female organs. Though banned more than 30 years ago, DDT can still be found in the breast milk of women all over the globe.

Since the Second World War, over 80,000 new synthetic chemicals have been manufactured and released into our environment, with 1,500 new chemicals introduced every year. With this increase come all sorts of problems with adverse interactions and unknown synergistic effects. It’s becoming increasingly difficult to isolate any one chemical in the body to find harmful effects. We are all walking test tubes with hundreds of toxins interacting in our liver, fat stores and active blood stream.

The medical research community continues to look for single smoking guns. A drug that cures cancer or a toxin that causes it. None of it is that simple. With research showing one out of three people in the U.S. will develop cancer in their lifetime, do we really think that global warming is our biggest concern? Yes, we should save energy and cut green house gases. But we should also quit poisoning ourselves and the planet. Eating healthy, fresh foods, cleaning with a little “elbow grease” instead of “Scrub Free”, and purchasing natural products will do more for us and the planet than any synthetic chemical or drug ever could.


About the author

Ellen Holder is co-founder of Caren, an online store for natural, organic and synthetic chemical free skin care products.

http://www.carenonline.com


Source : www.naturalnews.com

Global Warming : The Big Melt

Subhankar Banerjee/Associated Press

On Feb. 2, 2007, the United Nations scientific panel studying climate change declared that the evidence of a warming trend is "unequivocal," and that human activity has "very likely" been the driving force in that change over the last 50 years. The last report by the group, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in 2001, had found that humanity had "likely" played a role.

The addition of that single word "very" did more than reflect mounting scientific evidence that the release of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases from smokestacks, tailpipes and burning forests has played a central role in raising the average surface temperature of the earth by more than 1 degree Fahrenheit since 1900. It also added new momentum to a debate that now seems centered less over whether humans are warming the planet, but instead over what to do about it. In recent months, business groups have banded together to make unprecedented calls for federal regulation of greenhouse gases. The subject had a red-carpet moment when former Vice President Al Gore's documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," was awarded an Oscar; and the Supreme Court made its first global warming-related decision, ruling 5 to 4 that the Environmental Protection Agency had not justified its position that it was not authorized to regulate carbon dioxide.

The greenhouse effect has been part of the earth's workings since its earliest days. Gases like carbon dioxide and methane allow sunlight to reach the earth, but prevent some of the resulting heat from radiating back out into space. Without the greenhouse effect, the planet would never have warmed enough to allow life to form. But as ever larger amounts of carbon dioxide have been released along with the development of industrial economies, the atmosphere has grown warmer at an accelerating rate: Since 1970, temperatures have gone up at nearly three times the average for the 20th century.

The latest report from the climate panel predicted that the global climate is likely to rise between 3.5 and 8 degrees Fahrenheit if the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere reaches twice the level of 1750. By 2100, sea levels are likely to rise between 7 to 23 inches, it said, and the changes now underway will continue for centuries to come.

Source : topics.nytimes.com

Earth Day

April 22nd, Earth Day, marks the anniversary of the birth of the environmental movement. On April 22, 1970, approximately 20 million Americans protested against the poor treatment of the environment, highlighting deforestation, pollution, extinction, and growth of freeways.

 

Dennis Hayes, the national coordinator, makes it a point to highlight different issues every year exposing environmental impacts. In 1990, the focus was recycling and clean energy in 2000.

 

 

It has gained much popularity since its beginning and now has more than 500 million participating in activities and national governments in 175 countries.

 

In honor of Earth Day, take time to make a few, but significant, changes in your eco-habits:

 

  • Call your Representative or Senator and demand that they push for aggressive climate change and environmental legislations.

  • Don’t buy anything new today! Reduce your consumption habits by using less, reusing, and recycling! If you are in dire need of purchasing something, at least bring your own bag. Create less waste by not using plastic bags or simply reusing them until they tear.

  • Don’t drink out of plastic water bottles unless you are using them over and over.

  • Turn off lights when you leave the room for extended periods, especially if they aren’t fluorescent.

  • If you plan on buying coffee on your way to work or at work, bring your own mug.

  • Recycle, Recycle, RECYCLE!

 

There is of course a timeless Earth Day ritual, pick up trash on your way to work!

 

HAPPY EARTH DAY- If you have any self respect, than respect the earth that you walk on.

 

Written by: Molly Claire

Source : globalwarminglife.com

Read more

Post a Comment


Your Name :
Your Email:
Message/Comments: