If some Democratic lawmakers have their way, Gov. Chris Christie will no longer be able to plug budget gaps with money set aside for clean energy programs.

The chairmen of the two environmental committees in the Assembly yesterday said they planned to introduce legislation on Monday that would constitutionally dedicate money collected from utility ratepayers for programs to promote energy efficiency and develop a greater reliance on renewable resources, such as solar and wind power.

The legislation is designed to prevent the diversion of clean energy funds by this and other administrations, a practice that both former Gov. Jon Corzine and Gov. Chris Christie have used. Last year, Christie siphoned off roughly $400 million in funds that were collected from gas and electric customers to balance his state budget. He is suggesting to divert another $52 million in so-called Societal Benefit Charges (SBCs) assessed to ratepayers in the proposed budget for next year, which begins July 1.

The move rankled clean energy advocates and was even contested in state courts, but the administration’s diversion held up to scrutiny. Now the Republican governor has angered lawmakers once again with his decision last week to pull out of a 10-state regional initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Joining a group of military veterans who are opposed to pulling out of the regional program, dubbed the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), Assemblyman Upendra Chivukula (D-Somerset) and Assemblyman John McKeon (D-Essex), vowed to fight to restore New Jersey to the program.

Chivukula said legislation to have the state rejoin the program as well as a bill constitutionally dedicating societal benefits charges to clean energy and other programs previously approved by lawmakers will be introduced Monday.

When asked why the Governor would sign either bill, Chivukula replied, “We don’t know what the governor will do because he’s quite unpredictable.”

Still, the military veterans called the Governor’s decision “ll-timed” and “ill-conceived.” The group, Operation Free, said they are now raising funds to launch a radio and mailing campaign aimed at urging the governor to reconsider his decision, said former U.S. Army Captain Michael Breen, who is also vice president of the Truman National Security Project. “Climate change is an accelerant of instability,” said Breen, who served in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

“By staying with RGGI, we can work toward our energy independence,” added Lt. General Norman Seip, a longtime fighter pilot.

McKeon agreed. “This is a place to take a stand,” said the chairman of the Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee.

Besides diverting money from the SBC, Christie last year also siphoned off $65 million from RGGI to balance the budget. He has not taken any money from the program in next year’s budget.

Read the original article here

It might seem strange to think of the Environmental Protection Agency as an organization working to strengthen our national security. However, with its recent efforts to reduce dependence on oil and combat climate change, the EPA is doing just that.

The EPA is helping to stop the flow of oil funding to extremist organizations and reducing the chance that climate change could create breeding grounds for terrorists who wish to do our nation harm. In light of the EPA’s contribution to our nation’s security at home and abroad, upcoming efforts in Congress to paralyze the EPA are reckless, shortsighted, and dangerous, and I urge Senator Casey to strongly oppose them.

As a proud veteran who served my country for six years in the US Air Force, I am used to following my chain of command. And so last year, when the Department of Defense identified climate change and oil dependence as threats to our national security, I sat up and paid attention.

It is no secret that our dependence on foreign oil funds the terrorists we are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. The more oil we use here at home and at our military posts overseas, the more money ends up as IEDs and AK-47s in the hands of the Taliban and al Qaeda.

Furthermore, the aftermath of the massive flooding in Pakistan last year underscores the Department of Defense’s decision to identify climate change as a strategic threat to our national security. As the Pakistani government continues to have trouble delivering aid and assistance to the flood-stricken areas, extremists and terrorists have stepped into the void and gained even greater support for their organizations. If climate change is allowed to proceed unhindered, there is an even greater potential for the droughts, floods, and other catastrophic weather events that destabilize already vulnerable countries and create terrorist breeding grounds.

The threats posed by our oil dependence and climate change may be a topic of debate in Congress, but to the Department of Defense, they are crystal clear. The DOD has taken the lead in developing and implementing new clean energy technology, with every branch of the military following suit. The Navy is shooting to sail a carrier strike group – the “Great Green Fleet” – purely on biofuels by 2016. The Army and Marine Corps are investing in deployable solar generators to cut our use of diesel on the front lines. The Coast Guard is developing tidal energy projects to power remote stations and reduce its dependence on the civilian electrical grid. And the Air Force recently tested an A-10 “Warthog” aircraft running on a blend of fuel derived from camelina oil and conventional JP-8 jet fuel.

The military’s urgency in reducing our oil dependence and minimizing our contribution to climate change demonstrates the crucial role our energy policy plays in our national security strategy. The lives of our troops depend on it. Unfortunately, big-moneyed special interests in Washington are standing in the way of real advances in clean energy because they are invested in the status quo. Their latest scheme involves various pieces of legislation that would limit the EPA’s ability to limit carbon pollution or set emissions standards for automobiles.

This is the worst possible time for this type of legislation. If Congress bows to pressure from Big Coal and Big Oil – with their armies of lobbyists and back-room methods – America will take a step backward in our progress toward becoming a world leader in clean energy. Even a bill like Senator Jay Rockefeller’s, that sets a two-year delay on EPA regulation, would be disastrous for our efforts to combat climate change. Two years is far too long to allow pollution to spew into the air unchecked – the threat to our security is just too serious to ignore. With troops still on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, now is not the time for America to take a step backward – away from the clean energy technology that will reduce dependence on oil and save American lives down the road.

I urge my fellow veterans and other concerned citizens to contact Senator Casey and ask him to oppose this legislation – in order to say no to Big Oil and stand up for our men and women in uniform serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world. After everything they have sacrificed to keep Pennsylvania safe, it is the least we can do in return.

—

Jack Inacker is a member of the Truman National Security Project’s Pennsylvania Military Roundtable. He has been active in Operation Free, a group of veterans working to reduce dependence on oil and combat climate change. He served six years in the US Air Force as a nuclear weapons systems specialist, and lives in Philadelphia.

read the original article here.

Thank you for the opportunity to address you today on the first-ever
proposal to reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas pollution from
our nation’s commercial trucks.

My name is Chris Miller and I am a self-proclaimed ‘climate hawk’.  I
served almost nine years in the U.S. Army as a military WMD
specialist, including two combat tours in Baghdad, Iraq in 2003 and
2005.  In 2004 I was wounded in a suicide truck bombing for which I
received a Purple Heart.  I am a Combat Action Badge Recipient and 5-
time Army Commendation Medal winner.  I was a convoy security leader
and a military advisor to a new Iraqi Army battalion.  I am an energy
security advocate for Operation Free and a Fellow with the Truman
National Security Project.

I come here today not as a truck driver or technology expert or
climate change specialist, but as a veteran who has seen first hand
the dangerous relationship between our nation’s addiction to oil and
our national security.

In 2006, my second tour in Baghdad and part of ‘the surge’, I
witnessed firsthand the devastating effects of a new weapon being
employed by the insurgency there: EFPs.  EFPs are Explosive Formed
Projectiles that can penetrate up to three inches of solid steel,
including the armor on our humvees and tanks.  My brigade and our
Iraqi allies lost several soldiers to these devices.  They are so
powerful they are even capable of seriously damaging a ‘Buffalo’, a
special anti-IED military vehicle specifically designed to withstand
very large explosions.

EFPs are not a device that an amateur can devise and implement.  You
can’t find them on the internet or in books at the library.  They are
very complex weapons.  EFPs require a degree of training and expertise
that only a military explosives expert has.  These are not just rigged
up artillery shells or mortars.  They have an effect similar to an
enormous cannon blast at point-blank range.  I witnessed a device
where a lawn mower blade was used as a penetrator and it travelled
almost through the entire humvee, with deadly results for the men
inside.

We know today that the Iranian government is responsible for the
creation and use of these devices against our troops in Iraq with
devastating consequences.  Iraqi insurgents have received money,
equipment, and training from the Iranian military and intelligence
services and they continue to today.

Every military or insurgent force requires beans and bullets to
sustain itself.  I’m sorry to say that the United States is currently
a great source of income for the Iranian government and the
insurgency.  The money we spend on oil is being used to hurt and kill
our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines in large number and to fund
terrorism and Islamic extremism.

Every time the price of oil goes up by one dollar, Iran gets another
1.5 billion dollars to use against us.  The connection between our oil
addiction and the enemy couldn’t be clearer. We need to break that
connection by breaking our addiction.

The scope of our addiction is extensive.  The US consumes nearly 19
million barrels of oil a day, which is nearly a quarter of the oil
consumed in the entire world, and more than all EU nations combined.
Over half of the oil we use each day is imported from foreign
countries, many of which do not like us.  And more than 70 percent of
the oil we consume is used for transportation.

The rate at which we consume oil helps our enemies at the same time it
is threatening us. Just ask former CIA director Jim Woosley. ““Except
for our own Civil War, this is the only war that we have fought where
we are paying for both sides. We pay Saudi Arabia $160 billion for its
oil, and $3 or $4 billion of that goes to the Wahhabis, who teach
children to hate. We are paying for these terrorists with our SUVs.”

And we are not just addicted to oil at home. I can attest first hand
that our military is also addicted to oil. It takes billions of
gallons to run the military on the ground abroad. And that oil comes
from foreign nations that don’t like us. If one of these unfriendly
leaders ends oil exports to us, our military will be unable to
function effectively.

So how do we break our addiction to oil? We start at home. We ask
Americans to create technologies that can take our trucks farther on
one gallon of gasoline.  We look to industry leaders like Fed Ex who
have already put hundreds of efficient hybrid trucks on the roads. And
we ask our Government to implement programs that require deployment of
these cleaner and more efficient vehicles on a nationwide scale.

Will the policy being considered here today, alone, break our
addiction to oil? No. But reducing our oil consumption by 500 million
barrels as this program is estimated to do, is a vitally important
step.  By 2030, this rule alone would reduce daily oil use by enough
to offset all of the oil we imported this year from Iraq. And together
with similar policies underway to address fuel consumption and
greenhouse gases from passenger vehicles, our nation could save enough
oil to offset more than all of the oil we import from the entire
Middle East by 2025.

As retired General and 28th Commandant of the Marine Corps P.X. Kelley
and Frederick W. Smith, Chairman, President, and CEO of FedEx
Corporation said together in a letter to President Obama, “Simply put,
energy security cannot be improved without addressing oil dependence,
and oil dependence cannot be meaningfully reduced without addressing
transportation.”

You may hear testimony today about the challenges involved in meeting
the proposed standards. You may hear its going to be a hard road or a
slippery slope.  What you should keep in mind is that there are
tougher battles out there.  This may be a tough battle, but it’s not
as tough as what our troops are up against.

The benefits are wide spread. I’ve already mentioned the benefits to
national security and our troops. But what about the $74,000 that a
trucker could save over the life of a truck.  And the $41 billion in
savings to American families.

Manufacturers are helping our nation by producing vehicles that reduce
our dependence on oil and save American lives abroad. More than 150
U.S. companies are already employing a variety of trucks that make
fuel and pollution reductions far beyond the requirements of the
proposal being considered today. And individual truck owners who buy
cleaner vehicles will save money at the pump that will pay for the
upgrade in only a few years.  It’s time that these more fuel-efficient
vehicles become the norm.

I even hope that American ingenuity will not only succeed in providing
cleaner commercial trucks for US roads, but that the same technology
can be used to make our military vehicles more efficient and less
dependent on oil.

You’re going to hear a lot of numbers today, but I want you to write
these numbers down for me right now.  We’re going to do what we call
in the Army ‘beer math’.  Write down one above the other: 12.
365,000. 4.  12 is the number of men that I personally have known who
have given their lives on the battlefield in Iraq.  Men that I knew
and were in my unit.  365,000 was the usual number of American troops
serving in Iraq before the drawdown.  4 people is generally the size
of an American family.  As one soldier, I knew 12 soldiers that were
killed.  Multiply 12 by 365,000 and you get 4,320,000.  That’s 4.3
million soldiers’ lives affected by this issue.  Multiply that by a
family of 4 and you get 17,280,000.  That is 17.2 million American
soldiers and their families lives affected directly by this issue.

Another number you should remember is 24.  According to Navy Secretary
Ray Mabus, every 24th military convoy downrange results in the death
of a U.S. servicemember. I led missions every day in Baghdad, many of
which included hauling fuel for our unit to operate.  Up to 80% of the
loads of some convoys are fuel. More efficient vehicles mean less fuel
needed, which means less of our troops being killed.  That means more
of them get to go home.

The technology to improve vehicle fuel efficiency is available.
Cleaner vehicles more than pay for themselves in lower fuel costs.
And the cleaner trucks required by this rule will reduce our oil
addiction, improve our national security and, above all, save American
lives.   I don’t understand what we’re waiting for?

#6: NASCAR Driver Leilani Munter

Leilani Muenter, one of the top 10 female sports-car drivers in the world, is on a mission to change NASCAR’s gas-guzzling ways. Muenter, a mega-greenie, blogs about the cause and is very active in the fight for environmental legislation. Plus, she doesn’t let her sport off the hook. She has often discussed the need for NASCAR to make the switch to a renewable clean-energy source, and earlier this year she took part in the first eco-sponsored race-car team. Discovery Channel’s Planet Green network honored her in June 2010 by naming her the No. 1 eco-athlete in the country.

Check out the entire list here.

by Steve Maddox

Steve Maddox, of West Bloomfield, is a former Marine Corps Captain and an Iraq War Veteran. He is an alumnus of Cornell’s Johnson Graduate School of Management and a Truman National Security Fellow.

Americans would probably be surprised to learn that the most precious resource on a modern battlefield, in Iraq or Afghanistan, isn’t ammunition or rations, tanks or Humvees. Those things are certainly important, but fuel — gasoline — is the most critical resource to the modern military.

Seeing this dependency first hand as a Marine Officer in Iraq’s Haditha Triad made me start to think long and hard about our nation’s dangerous dependence on oil from unfriendly nations — and about the best ways to end it. That’s why so many veterans across the country, who have seen this dependence first hand, are excited about the Environmental Protection Agency’s new car mileage standards.

When we fill up at the pump, we are pouring millions of dollars a day into the treasuries of hostile nations. Much of that money funnels into the coffers of those same terrorist groups our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines face every day. Enemy bullets and IEDs are bought with our dirty oil money and fired back upon our own men and women — often imported or funded by countries like Iran. This cycle is unacceptable, dangerous, and must be stopped. Congress failed to pass energy and climate legislation this summer, but there is still much that can be done to solve this threat to national security.

By raising our fuel efficiency standards we can dramatically lower the amount of oil we require as a nation to go about our daily lives, thereby stemming the flow of money to enemy nations and diminishing the disastrous consequences of climate change.

Read entire article here.

by Anne Swift

For Bill Sheets, the concept of energy independence hit close to home.  Even years after deployment to Operation Desert Storm with the U.S. Air Force, he could still see the skies dark with soot and smoke and the oil rigs burning in the distance.  As part of a Scorched Earth Policy, Iraqi military forces had set fire to 700 Kuwait oil wells in January and February of 1991.  The fires burned for ten months, destroying an estimated six million barrels of oil daily and spreading pollution to the oil and the air.

His unforgettable Desert Storm experience made Bill well aware of the devastating consequences of relying so heavily on foreign oil. But, his realization also armed him with a vision: Energy Independence through clean, alternative power sources.

It was hard to ignore such a formidable idea, especially when stationed in Germany, a country known for its leadership in solar energy adoption.  Bill’s vision became even stronger when he relocated to Arizona, a state with an extremely high potential for solar.  Although he had completed his military duty and retired by 2001, years of service had instilled in Bill a commitment to civic duty.   “Even though your civic duty is to go to the polls and vote, you also have a daily duty to vote with your dollars,” Bill explained when asked why he decided to dedicate a portion of his monthly energy payments to solar.  By opting for a solar power service, Bill took control of his energy payments to avoid unpredictable rate changes and save money on energy bills.  He also exercised his freedom to switch to a clean energy source.

Bill’s choice to go solar was also driven by his desire to “reduce the consumption of fossil fuels and keep the carbon underground.”  By switching to solar power, Bill knew he was making a difference – not only to his electric bill, but also to national security and the environment.  Running a country on dirty and imported energy comes with costs outside of our electric bills.  As veterans well know, nations go to war over natural resources such as oil, causing a loss of human lives and destruction of the environment.  Most recently, the BP oil spill has endangered the Gulf of Mexico’s ecosystem, putting hundreds of species of flora and fauna at risk and overturning the area’s local fishing and tourism economies.  Another example of the perils of using coal for power was the coal mining disaster in West Virginia in April of 2010, which killed 29 men and was the worst such disaster in the U.S. since 1970.  Solar power is clean, unlimited, and independent from the influence of both foreign nations and utility companies, and Bill sets a leading example for fellow veterans who have experienced the dangers of foreign oil first hand

Solar power is infinitely abundant, with 89,000 times more energy than humans consume hitting the earth each and every day.  It’s no wonder demand for solar has grown at more than 30% per year worldwide for the last 15 years, particularly as the cost of solar panels has decreased by more than 100 times of what they were in the 1970s.

With prices of solar power coming down, veterans like Bill are taking personal responsibility for sourcing their energy locally and cleanly.  In addition to empowering veterans and homeowners to free themselves of foreign oil, distributed solar systems (i.e. solar systems on individual houses or buildings) are quick to set up and don’t require expensive transmission lines that are time-intensive to construct.

For many homeowners, the greatest barrier to going solar is the cost of the solar panels, which ranges anywhere between $25,000 and $40,000.  In addition, costs of maintenance and servicing can add up quickly, often to around $7,000 over the life of the system.  To offset the costs of these panels, veterans like Bill can opt for solar leasing programs and power purchase agreements (PPAs), which deliver solar for little or no upfront cost.  Bill uses a solar power service from SunRun Inc., a company that pioneered financing options for home solar systems so homeowners can go solar affordably and without concerns about maintenance and monitoring.  Today, solar power purchase agreements and solar leases support more than 3,500 jobs across the country, growing by more than 50% each year. In fact, the residential solar industry creates eight times as many jobs per unit of energy as the coal industry because each installation requires local installers.

Solar power service makes going solar as simple as signing up for cable television or a cell phone plan, and, as Bill demonstrates, it makes independence from fossil fuels, foreign oil, and utility rate hikes an affordable reality.  For veterans familiar with the perils of war, going solar provides an opportunity to fulfill a civic duty long after they have served their country.

Anne Swift is a marketing manager at SunRun, the nation’s leading home solar company.

___________________________

A Message from Tim:

As a veteran who served in the Middle East, I’d like to propose a new way to support our troops… Getting our country off foreign oil by making a switch to electric cars. I’m starting the movement and I hope you’ll join by voting for me to win an all new, 100% electric Nissan Leaf. Whoever gets the most votes will win. And if it’s me, I’ll donate $2,000 to charity.

3 Quick and Easy Steps:
1) Click here to cast your vote – 1 vote for each email address
2) Cast your vote(s) by entering your email address(es)*
3) Confirm your vote(s) by clicking on the link in the email you receive
*Your email address will not be shared, stored, or used for any other purpose

Please forward to your friends, post on facebook and twitter, and pass it on!
Thank you and Happy Veterans Day!
Tim Goodrich (Torrance, CA)

Veterans asked, and New Mexico answered.

As a US Marine Corps veteran and New Mexico native, I stand behind the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board’s decision to take the lead in clean energy by setting rules on carbon pollution emissions.  New limitations on our biggest polluters will slash New Mexico’s contribution to climate change and reduce our dependence on hostile nations for dirty fossil fuels.  Military installations at home and abroad, including our own Fort Bliss, are already leading by example and creating their own energy to reduce our contribution to climate change.  Now, New Mexico is following the military’s lead.  I knew that my fellow New Mexicans would rather stand up with military and security leaders than to blindly accept the status quo.  The New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board has made the right decision – the decision to protect our citizens and our troops – by implementing limitations on carbon emissions.

Click here to read about the NM EIB’s decision to adopt a statewide cap and trade plan.

12th district hopeful has uphill fight.

Rick Wills

Democrat Zack Byrnes has spent weeks knocking on doors in the state’s sprawling 12th House District, which has been represented by Republican Daryl Metcalfe since 1998.

Byrnes, who is 25, a graduate of Butler High School and attended Cornell University, has an uphill fight. Metcalfe, who is Republican chairman of the House Intergovernmental Affairs committee, has never won an election with less than 62 percent of the vote.

There is little agreement between the candidates on issues and problems the state faces.

Both express concerns about potential taxpayer bailouts of public employee pensions. Metcalfe favors eliminating pensions for public employees.

“Government pensions are breaking governments. This is putting taxpayers on the hook for bad returns. It’s good to incentivize people to save their own money,” Metcalfe said.

Byrnes said the potential crisis is a result of increasing benefits in 2001 and not requiring increased contributions by employers.

Byrnes favors term limits; Metcalfe opposes them.

Byrnes says Metcalfe devotes nearly all of his attention to explosive national issues at the expense of the district.

For full article click here

Letter: Cornell du Houx is true green

I was surprised when Green Party candidate Fred Horch decided to run in House District 66 against Rep. Alex Cornell du Houx this year. After all, in just two years, Alex has not only led a variety of initiatives in the Legislature on weatherization and clean energy business, but has also shown impressive national leadership as vice chairman of the National Council of State Legislators Energy Committee and in his significant work with the Truman Project on the issues of climate change and oil dependence. If ever there was a candidate who needs no Green opposition, it’s Cornell du Houx.

I was even more surprised when I attended one of the debates Horch graciously sponsored and heard his lukewarm response to the promise of all of the alternative forms of energy Cornell du Houx has sponsored in the Legislature – off-shore and on-shore wind, hydro, biofuel, and tidal – none of which seems to interest Horch much. He’s pushing solar, which certainly makes sense for Arizona or Texas. But this is Maine, and though we’re unlikely ever to lead the nation in solar energy, we may well do so in wind, while at the same time becoming considerably less dependent on oil.

Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems to me the real environmental candidate in this election is Cornell du Houx. I only wish he were in my district so I could vote for him.

For full article click here

Big Oil’s ads spread lies

Big Oil will stop at nothing to protect their profits at the expense of American national security. This fall, we’re seeing new television ads that are paid for by Big Oil front groups. The purpose of these ads is simple: to spread lies and misinformation about clean, alternative energy sources in order to protect their profits.

The time has come for every American patriot to stand up to the Big Oil lies and say it is time to stop investing in the buggy whip of the 21st century and time to start investing in America’s future.

For full article click here.

Support military by putting an end to oil-funded violence (op-ed)

New Mexico’s soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines volunteer their lives in the defense of this great nation, and we understand the risk involved in our chosen career. However, some of the danger our armed forces face can be prevented.

Every day, the U.S. pays $1 billion for energy, much of it to hostile regimes that funnel the funds to terrorist groups. And while America’s oil money fuels enemy nations and their extremist allies, the carbon pollution caused by that same dirty fuel leads to the floods, famines and droughts that dissolve already volatile nations into the perfect breeding grounds for terrorist groups.

The U.S. Senate’s failure of leadership this summer to achieve comprehensive climate and energy reform has allowed the perpetuation of roadside bombs falling into the hands of Iraqi insurgents and bullets into the AK-47s of the Taliban. However, New Mexico has the opportunity to bypass the deadlock in Washington and to help minimize the risks faced by our men and women in uniform. New Mexico must lead America toward a cleaner, safer future through the limitation of dangerous carbon pollution.

It is time for New Mexicans to stand up with these military and security leaders to solve this appalling national-security debacle. We as a nation must stand strong on our own, and we can start at home by promoting clean, domestic energy in New Mexico.

Army Pvt. Charles M. High IV from Albuquerque died Aug. 17 in Kunar province, Afghanistan, of wounds sustained when an improvised explosive device caused a military vehicle rollover. The improvised explosive device that hit Pvt. High’s vehicle was an EFP, or explosively formed projectile. The EFP is the new, deadlier breed of IED, or improvised explosive device, dirty explosives that pierce our thickest armor. Every soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan is gravely familiar with these roadside bombs, which have killed or injured thousands of our men and women in uniform.

These EFPs, which rip through our heavily armored vehicles and have caused hundreds of American casualties, were introduced to Iraqi and Afghan insurgents by oil-rich Iran. The connection between energy, our national security and the sacrifices made by our military could not be more clear.

For full article click here

Fuel convoys, snaking their way across the mountains of Afghanistan or, for the past few years, through
the streets of Baghdad, are vulnerable and easily accessible targets for insurgents in these countries.
The fact is that America’s reliance on oil — on the battlefield, and here at home — makes us vulnerable
to foreign forces and unfriendly nations.

The failure of the Senate to act on energy legislation was a disappointment, but senators still have the
opportunity to cut our dependence on oil and take advantage of clean, domestic energy production by
raising fuel efficiency standards.

As a veteran who protected convoys during my tour in Iraq, I have seen how dangerous it is to be so
dependent on a single source of energy. I am no longer willing to stand idly by while our men and
women of the armed services are put in harm’s way to protect our oil interests abroad.

From a national security standpoint, our dependence on oil makes us extremely vulnerable. As a former
soldier, I understand the value in going to unfriendly nations with the intent of protecting our country.
However, I do not see the value in allowing our dependence on oil to put our troops in even more
danger.

For full article click here

Strong fuel efficiency standards can help save a soldier’s life.
Nick Breeze

The most dangerous job in Iraq, and now in Afghanistan, is probably not what you expect — it’s driving a truck.

Fuel convoys, snaking their way across the mountains of Afghanistan or, for the past few years, through the streets of Baghdad, are vulnerable and easily accessible targets for insurgents in these countries. The fact is that America’s reliance on oil — on the battlefield, and here at home — makes us vulnerable to foreign forces and unfriendly nations.

The failure of the Senate to act on energy legislation was a disappointment, but senators still have the opportunity to cut our dependence on oil and take advantage of clean, domestic energy production by raising fuel efficiency standards.

As a veteran who protected convoys during my tour in Iraq, I have seen how dangerous it is to be so dependent on a single source of energy. I am no longer willing to stand idly by while our men and women of the armed services are put in harm’s way to protect our oil interests abroad.

From a national security standpoint, our dependence on oil makes us extremely vulnerable. As a former soldier, I understand the value in going to unfriendly nations with the intent of protecting our country. However, I do not see the value in allowing our dependence on oil to put our troops in even more danger.

During my time in Iraq, I saw every day how dependent we were on fuel just to run basic necessities such as our vehicles and generators. We are paying huge costs to ensure that our bases overseas are getting the fuel they need to operate — both monetarily and in human lives.

On Friday, the Environmental Protection Agency presented ambitious fuel efficiency goals that vehicles might be required to meet by 2025. A formal proposal will be made in September 2011.

We must make sure that these standards are just as aggressive as our stance against terrorism.

Raising gas mileage standards not only saves us a ton of money at the pump, it could save lives. Higher standards will make us more secure as a nation by making us less dependent on our enemies for fuel. Raising fuel efficiency standards is a win-win for us, though Big Oil and their band of lobbyists will try to tell a different story.

For full article click here

New York Times (via Greenwire). Sep 28, 2010.

Republicans Blitz Obama Over EPA’s ‘Anti-Industrial’ Regulations.

Robin Bravender and Gabriel Nelson.

With the November midterm election nearing, Republicans in Congress are focusing their fire on U.S. EPA, describing the agency’s regulations on greenhouse gases and air pollution as the product of a “job-killing” Obama administration.

Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, the top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, has put together a laundry list of grievances about the agency’s regulatory agenda. His report, which will be released this afternoon, is the latest in a series from Inhofe, who previously investigated the “Climategate” controversy and issued a report accusing the Obama administration of bungling its response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

“Unfortunately, the Obama EPA favors bureaucracy and heavy-handed intervention more than jobs and growth,” says a draft of the new report that was reviewed by Greenwire. “In many cases, outmoded provisions of the [Clean Air Act] are no longer tools to achieve clean air, but blunt instruments for EPA to enact anti-industrial policies.”

The report tallies potential job losses and economic impacts from the agency’s new greenhouse gas regulations, emissions standards for cement plants, proposed emissions rules for industrial boilers and the proposed tightening of the ozone standard.

Inhofe struck a populist tone this morning while previewing the report in an interview with conservative talk show host Ed Morrissey.

“All this silly stuff that they’re doing over at the EPA costs money,” Inhofe said, “and it disadvantages the poor more than anybody else.”

For full article click here

Operation Free visits, holds town hall meeting

Rebeka Sorge

Operation Free, a coalition of Veterans and national security organizations, visited Gannon University Monday to talk about a major threat to the national security of the United States: energy inefficiency.

operationfree.net

(Operationfree.net) Operation Free is a non partisan group that aims to secure America with clean energy.

When many of us hear the word energy efficiency, the words “environment” and “economy” may come to mind. Operation Free takes a different approach; it believes that the United States’ energy dependence is a threat to its ability to defend its citizens and prosper.

“We believe in energy independence,” United States Air Force Lt. Gen. (Ret.) Norman Seip, a speaker for Operation Free, said.

According to statistics, the United States spends roughly $1 billion a day on oil.  In return, this money is going toward countries that are enemies of the United States and are using the money to buy weapons and other war supplies.

“We are paying for the bullets that wound our soldiers,” said Jonathan Murray, Operation Free campaign manager and Marine veteran.

Operation Free, an organization started by veterans, aims to inform people of the need to find a reliable source of energy aside from oil. There are many alternative energy sources, such as solar and wind power. Technology can make oil and natural gas cleaner and more efficient.

The energy problem does not just affect environmental protection groups or economists; it affects the entire United States. All Americans are paying high gas prices, and many know of a soldier who has died in the war. The United States’ dependence on resources from nations that are enemies has caused conflict, and it shows up in the news almost daily.

For full article click here

Defend America with clean energy bills

Jason Whitaker (Op-Ed)

Our heroic service members are in harm’s way each day they wear the uniform of the United States military. Around the globe, they defend our national security interests so that we can be safer here at home.

America’s fighting men and women signed up for this because they care for our country and want to keep it stronger for future generations. Yet in the face of this enormous sacrifice, our troops encounter perils beyond wildest imagination, threats that undoubtedly can and must be prevented. In order to make this happen, Senators must start leading and work to end our addiction to oil.

Our forces deployed the Middle East are all too familiar with IEDs – Improvised Explosive Devices – which have killed many military personnel and countless numbers of innocent civilians. My lieutenant was a victim of such an IED during one of our convoys in Afghanistan. His Humvee exploded just two vehicles in front of me. And the newest, and most deadly of these weapons are called EFPs, or Explosively Formed Projectiles. Able to penetrate our best armor, these roadside bombs are brutally effective.

These deadly weapons are being paid for by oil money and came to Iraq from oil-rich Iran. In fact, for every $1 increase in the price of a gallon of gas, Iran makes another $1.5 billion to use against our soldiers. The connection between energy, our national security, and the sacrifices made by our military couldn’t be more obvious. Our reliance on their vast oil reserves enriches the extremists who directly threaten our military and way of life.

One of the best ways everyday Americans can decrease our dependence is by driving more fuel efficient cars. It will save America billions in oil money sent overseas and each of us thousands in the cost of running our cars. That’s exactly what the Environmental Protection Agency’s new rules on car fuel efficiency, due out in October, will accomplish – and it’s why their action is so important.

For full article click here

Retired military leaders, veterans to discuss energy, security

APPLETON — Retired military  leaders and local veterans will hold a roundtable discussion with residents at noon today at the Veterans of Foreign Wars Hall, 501 N. Richmond St.

The discussion will highlight the connection between climate change, oil dependence and national security.

The event aims to engage the public in what Operation Free believes to be shortsighted Senate proposals to stall the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to limit carbon pollution.

Participants in the discussion include Maj. General Donald Edwards, U.S. Army (ret.); Appleton native and U.S. Army Iraq War veteran Robin Eckstein; and U.S. Marine Corps veteran Jonathan Murray.

For full article click here

Coalition plans campaign to protect EPA climate action, mulls future direction

Anne C. Mulkern, E&E reporter

A coalition thwarted in its effort to secure climate legislation will launch a campaign this week aimed at protecting what it sees as a last line of defense: U.S. EPA’s ability to regulate carbon pollution.

Clean Energy Works, an alliance of about 80 environmental, labor, religious, veteran and other groups, plans a host of strategies including television ads, petitions and town hall meetings.

“If we’re going to do this in a meaningful way at the federal level, it’s got to happen through EPA,” said Steve Cochran, vice president of Environmental Defense Fund’s climate and air program and a member of Clean Energy Works. “There’s no other way to deal with greenhouse gases at the federal level.”

The effort comes as Congress returns from its August break. Several lawmakers have indicated support for amendments that would block or delay EPA’s ability to act.

The coalition’s thrust on EPA also happens as the alliance decides how it will approach the climate issue moving forward. Members of Clean Energy Works are talking about whether the group will exist in its current form or significantly retool now that it appears unlikely this Congress will act on climate or energy legislation. It is also searching for new strategies, which could include a greater emphasis at the state level.

For full article click here

Pueblo Politics: Vet groups call for Petraeus ad to go off the air in CD8

Andrea Kelly

A national veteran’s group that supports clean energy has called on the local Conservatives for Congress Committee to remove its ad criticizing U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ inquiry about renewable energy in America’s wars.

The Operation Free organization includes more than 700 veterans who have participated in lobbying activities in Washington, D.C., gone on a multi-state tour, or signed letters asking Congress to take action to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil.

For full article click here