The major risks with tar sand include dealing with pollution, and with lawsuits from native tribes that live near the oil sands.(Photo courtesy of the US DOE)
Several investors’ groups want four major oil companies to reveal the risks of getting oil from Canadian tar sands. Rebecca Williams reports shareholders will be considering this at BP’s general meeting this week:
Transcript
Several investors’ groups want four major oil companies to reveal the risks of getting oil from Canadian tar sands. Rebecca Williams reports shareholders will be considering this at BP’s general meeting this week:
Tar sands are kind of like they sound: they’re sand or clay soaked in oil. Canada’s tar sands are the second largest oil reserves in the world, so oil companies are all over them. But it’s a dirtier source of oil.
Several investors groups have filed shareholder resolutions with BP, Conoco-Phillips, Shell, and Exxon-Mobil. They want companies to reveal the risks to stockholders of getting oil from tar sands.
Emily Stone is with Green Century Capital Management.
“We want these companies to be more forthright about what they see as the big risks and how they’re mitigating those risks.”
She says risks include dealing with pollution… and lawsuits from native tribes that live near the oil sands.
BP did not want to be recorded for this story. But in a statement to shareholders, BP told them to vote no. BP says Canada’s oil sands are a proven and secure source of oil.
A big shift away from fossil fuels isn’t scaring off everybody. Some businesses are actually lobbying for climate change legislation.
(Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
As Congress begins debate on climate
change legislation, American businesses
are watching very closely. Some are
worried that a new law could bankrupt
them with energy costs. But others
see a bright future under carbon limits.
Julie Grant reports:
Transcript
As Congress begins debate on climate
change legislation, American businesses
are watching very closely. Some are
worried that a new law could bankrupt
them with energy costs. But others
see a bright future under carbon limits.
Julie Grant reports:
Jeff Holmstead is an environmental attorney and has been working on clean air issues for two decades now. He led the Air Division of the Environmental Protection Agency under the Bush Administration and has worked on some of the most significant environmental regulations in the nation’s history. But he says the current climate change bill is the biggest thing he’s seen.
“It’s a big deal. Much bigger than really any other environmental legislation or regulation than people have had to deal with in the past.”
Holmstead says the stakes are just so high. He says the costs could reach into the hundreds of billions of dollars for American businesses.
“And there’s just also enormous amounts of uncertainty as to how we would fundamentally change our society, which has really grown up largely using fossil fuels. Whether we can truly switch away from that in the kind of time frame that people are talking about.”
But a big shift away from fossil fuels isn’t scaring off everybody. Some businesses are actually lobbying for climate change legislation.
Commercial: “Climate change is real. But solving it is a real opportunity. If we build clean energy technologies in America, we’ll generate the jobs that will power the 21st century and jumpstart our economy. We need a can-do plan that caps greenhouse gas pollution and creates jobs here at home.”
This commercial is not made by a bunch of tree-huggers, liberals, or Al Gore. It stars the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, and corporate CEOs from Deere and Company and the Eaton Corporation. Eaton makes everything from circuit breakers to hoses to hybrid trucks.
“Yeah, Eaton is a power management company that sales about
15-billion dollars and 70,000 employees worldwide.”
That’s Joe Wolfsberger. He’s in charge of environmental programs at Eaton. The company wants Congress to approve climate change legislation and to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Wolfsberger says it could be a great kick-start for the economy and help create jobs.
“We also see a very big opportunity for Eaton and other companies, especially in this power management area. We’ll be able to provide solutions for people to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions going forward, to help reduce the amount of fuel they consume on the road as part of their operations.”
The company has already created new hybrid transmissions for delivery trucks. They’re used in lots of UPS, Fed-Ex, and Wal-Mart trucks. Wolfsberger says it improves gas mileage 50% to 70%.
Wolfsberger says a lot of companies are still questioning whether climate change is real. He says Eaton CEO Alexander Cutler gets asked about it a lot.
“And his response to them is, ‘it doesn’t really matter if the data is good or not. It doesn’t matter if it’s a normal climatic cycle. The question is, if you as a company can do better, you should do better.’”
But that may be easy to say when your company will benefit from climate change legislation. It’s a lot tougher when your business is producing natural gas or making steel and depends on heavy use of fossil fuels.
Environmental attorney Jeff Holmstead says the price of reducing greenhouse gases is going to be a lot higher for these types of companies if a bill passes. He says that’s what the debate is all about.
“Should we be spending a hundred billion dollars a year, should we be spending a trillion dollars a year? I think most people believe we could significantly reduce our CO2 emissions, it’s just a question of how much we’re willing to pay, and also what we get for that.”
And this what Congress will be debating in the coming months – whether the possibility of higher energy bills is worth the chance to have a more stable climate and more energy independence.
Opponents in the House argued last Friday that the climate change bill would make energy much more expensive. (Photo courtesy of the Architect of the Capitol)
The climate change bill heads to the Senate. In all likelihood, so will some inaccurate statistics. Lester Graham reports some opponents of the climate change and energy bill are still using numbers they’ve been told are wrong:
Transcript
The climate change bill heads to the Senate. In all likelihood, so will some inaccurate statistics. Lester Graham reports some opponents of the climate change and energy bill are still using numbers they’ve been told are wrong:
Opponents in the House argued last Friday that the climate change bill would make energy much more expensive.
For example, Congressman Paul Broun, a Republican from Georgia, said it would hit low-income people especially hard.
“People who can least afford to have their energy taxes raised by – MIT says, by over $3100 per family.”
Several opponents used that $3100 figure. But, that’s just not correct.
In April we talked to the author of that MIT study, John Reilly.
“They’re really kind of just misinforming the debate and trying to scare people with numbers that really aren’t accurate.”
Reilly says he’s told the Republicans they’ve got the numbers wrong.
“The right number is actually $340 not $3100 or something.”
And a Congressional Budget Office analysis indicates the cost could be even lower.
Election Day is right around the corner. About 70-percent of the voting age population in the United States is registered to vote. If national voting patterns hold true, only about half of those registered voters will go to the polls in this off-year election. A still smaller group of Americans will have laid the groundwork leading up to election day. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator, Julia King, asks if you’ve done your part for democracy this season:
Transcript
Election Day is right around the corner. About 70% of the voting age population in the
United States is registered to vote. If national voting patterns hold true, only about half of
those registered voters will go to the polls in this off-year election. A still smaller group
of Americans will have laid the groundwork leading up to election day. Great Lakes Radio
Consortium commentator Julia King asks if you’ve done your part for democracy this
season.
There’s an election coming. Have you done your fair share of the work?
Can I let you in on a little secret? Some of us were talking the other day and we’re tired of
carrying most of the democracy load while the rest of you sit on your bums.
What’s that you say? You VOTE? Ha! That’s a mere drop in the proverbial ocean of
democracy.
Have you ever volunteered your time for a candidate? If you don’t like any of the
candidates, have you encouraged a decent, competent person you do like to run for office?
Have you considered running yourself? Have you ever worked the polls? A whole 14-
hour shift?
Have you ever written a check to a candidate? One that’s big enough to help, but not so
big that it’s an attempt to finance an unpopular agenda (like federal funding for circus
pigeon farmers)?
Have you talked civilly with your friends and neighbors about the issues? Asked others’
opinions – from the political left and right – and told them yours?
Have you stuffed envelopes, delivered yard signs, organized a candidate forum or debate?
Have you asked local media to do a better job of covering elections – reminded them that
the most crucial coverage comes not on election night, but in the months and weeks leading
up it?
Yes, yes, everybody’s busy (and yes, I’m aware that I’m preaching). But democracy
doesn’t just happen. Somebody’s got to do the work. If you’re one of those people who’s
been doing your chores, pat yourself on the back. Keep it up.
If you’re one of the people who’s been coasting up until now, consider pitching in. But
like the third grade teacher who ends the lecture with ‘You know who you are,’ these
words aren’t for everyone. There are countless Americans whose lives are already
bursting at the seams with inescapable poverty or tragedy, or both. Those citizens are
already doing their fair share.
These words are for the other countless Americans – the ones who throw great dinner
parties and find the perfect pair of shoes, or build model airplanes in the garage, or never
miss the West Wing. These words are for happy, healthy Americans who benefit the most
from democracy and simply give too little back.
So if you fit that description, this is for you: Get off your bum and do some work for
democracy. There’s an election coming, for goodness sake.
Julia King lives and writes in Goshen, Indiana. She comes to us by way of the Great Lakes Radio Consortium.
Seven of the eight Great Lakes states have governor’s races next month. One analyst says the results of those elections could affect how well the states work together on the environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports:
Transcript
Seven of the eight Great Lakes states have Governor’s races this month. One analyst says
the results of those elections could affect how well the states work together on the
environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach reports.
There will be at least four new governors in the Great lakes region, due to incumbents
stepping down. Political scientists say a fifth incumbent may be voted out of office.
Barry Rabe is a professor of environmental policy and public policy at the University of
Michigan. He says the eight governors have traditionally agreed on some issues like
diversion of water. But Rabe says the upcoming elections could affect more contentious
issues.
“I think where other challenges emerge are on issues like air pollution – where you
literally may have prevailing wind patterns so that say, the pollutants that begin in Illinois
may wind up in Michigan and other states – and how states could work cooperatively to
resolve those issues.”
Rabe also says more of the Great Lakes governors may soon have to work together on
water quality and global warming. Democrats hope to gain several governor’s seats in the
region. But Rabe says for cooperation purposes, personality may be more important than
party label.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.
Missouri could become the first state in the country to ask voters
whether to cap the number of billboards along interstate highways.
Supporters of the effort say they have gathered enough signatures to
place
the billboard ban on the November ballot. The Great Lakes Radio
Consortium’s Bill Raack reports:
In California, New Jersey, and now Minnesota, candidates for Governor are running on the Green Party. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s David Hammond has more:
The major risks with tar sand include dealing with pollution, and with lawsuits from native tribes that live near the oil sands.(Photo courtesy of the US DOE)
