Bu-Bye for Now

On this charming sunday afternoon, I am technically writing my last blog as a spring semester blogger. It is therefore time for some reflective, reflexive, introspective thinking thoughts, if you know what I mean. My bosses recently informed me that a lot of people read this blog - so thanks to everyone who has checked in on occasion. It is hard to imagine the people who pass through here - invisible internet spectators. I kinda imagined myself as articulating my thoughts out into an empty web connection. My summer contract starts next week, and I will work on making this blog more interactive. I would love to hear many many more comments - disagree with me, agree with me, whatever. Just let me know I am not alone is cyberspace! Anyways, I think many of us college students are about to begin the final sprint towards the end of the year - I have to write 5 papers in 2 weeks and soon I take an environmental geochemistry final. But, I wanted to invite you all to tune into my summer exploits, starting next week. My summer program, the Howard Hughes summer program at Wesleyan, starts on May 28th. Here is a tantalizing spippet of what is to come.

Meet Professor Sultan - I will be working in her lab this summer on cross-generational plasticity. (In my opinion, cross-generational plasticity essentially confirms some of Lamarck's old and crazy ideas about evolution). She is stern, funny and incredibly intelligent. She also has the reputation of not messing around. Ever. She calls the plants in the lab, "her people."

Meet the greenhouse - the warm, misty place where I shall spend lots of time potting and repotting plants. There are cool things in the greenhouse which I am not allowed to touch yet. Like crazy hoses, artificial rain and millions of baby plants.

Me - an untrained would-be researcher who is more interested in policy issues than in experimental design (shhhh, don't tell). A girl who is living away from home for her first summer, in a large 6 person house. Luckily, she's got her boyfriend, and her two baby turtles (Shakira and BamBam) to keep her company.

Expect grilling, lots of tofu, obsessive plant talk and more.

Best of luck to all,
Emily

PS. If anyone has any helpful comments to make, or suggestions for improvement, please please let me know. Starting next week I will be blogging more frequently and your comments can help guide my thoughts.

NASA Scientists looking silly

I have been having a bit of trouble with my blog pictures lately, but I hope that the pics above turned out alright. Two are 3-D shots taken of the sun (the first 3-D pictures of the sun ever made, ever!) And, apparently, although the technology to create these photographs was exceedingly advanced, the NASA scientists still need to use the same red and blue 3-D glasses you get on Disney World Rides. You would have thought that they would have created new, high-tech looking goggles. But no. What is good enough for the "A Bug's Life" ride is good enough for NASA scientists. Let this be a lesson. hahahahaha.

Check out:


Hmmm, the spring-summer air is making me feel giddy. So, instead of referring you guys to more articles, here is a link for "Assignment Earth" - a TV-show like site with tons of different clips on interesting topics (like rats in NY City, or wind power on Indian reservations). I suggest you check these out, in between lying out on the grass and beginning the mad dash towards final projects.

What to do about Nuclear Energy

Now, don't get me wrong, the title of this blog may give the impression that I am here to solve all of our nuclear woes. That seems unlikely. However, as I was reading today about US worries over Iran's nuclear program I asked myself a question, "why do we assume that Iran's true purpose in developing a nuclear program is to develop nuclear weapons rather than nuclear power?" In other words, how closely are nuclear power and nuclear weapons related? Does any country with the capacity for nuclear power have the ability to build nuclear weapons? These questions are relevant because often times the same parties who are pro-nuclear (power) in the US are the ones vehemently opposed to allowing Iran to build a nuclear program. Don't get me wrong, I fear the idea of a world in which Iran, under its current anti-American and Israel leadership, obtains nuclear weapons. However, I would like the chance to think a bit about these questions anyways.



The above picture is of a nuclear reactor facility - you can see the clouds of vapor arising from the giant cooling towers. Actually, if any of you guys drive route 95 on George Washington Bridge from New Jersey to New York City (a route I take waay too often) you can see similar nuclear reactors while coming over the bridge.

From what I can gather, part of the reason that nuclear energy for civilian electricity generation and nuclear weapons are so intimately associated is that the technology underpinning both was first used to create nuclear weapons - during WWII. First the uranium bomb and then the plutonium bomb were created and "tested" during that time. It was not until 1954 that the first nuclear electricity plant for civilian use was built in Russia. The first United States plant was built in 1956 in Pennsylvania. In the years that followed the success of nuclear energy was shaky at best - although nuclear power plants run very efficiently when operated, they require tremendous capital to build. During the 1970's, 80s and 90s, very few new power plants were built. Currently, there are 103 (soon to be 104) operating nuclear power plant in the United States. They generate 20% of our electricity (this number varies from state to state.)

Another historical reason that nuclear energy and nuclear weapons have been coupled is that it takes a great deal of capital to finance a nuclear reactor - therefore, proponents of nuclear weapons research decided that it would be expedient to make the plant a producer both of nuclear material and of nuclear power. (from the Nuclear Energy Information Service http://www.neis.org/literature/Brochures/weapcon.htm).


http://www.nrdc.org/nuclear/images/chart.gif


The above chart is from an MIT study by Professor Paul Joskow entitled, "The Future of Nuclear Power." He believes that overall, nuclear power is more expensive given the extreme capital required to build and maintain one. Nuclear power relies on high federal subsidies of nuclear projects - and when those do not exist, the private sector is unwilling to invest in them. Recently, the federal government has looked favorably upon nuclear energy and has included hefty subsidies in recent energy bills.

Now lets turn to the trickier issue of nuclear weapons. I am poking around on the NRDC website and found that the NRDC, FAS (Federation of American Scientists) and GoogleEarth have teamed up to give free downloads of the location of America's nuclear weapons stockpiles. Obviously, the political statement they are making is that we have too many of them (although they are down from the cold war peak). I hope that the map below will show up (it is a tricky file) - but if not the information is readily accessible a number of places. Which makes you wonder. (Nuclear stockpiles are excellent terrorist targets, as are, incidentally, nuclear power plants.)

http://www.nrdc.org/media/docs/061109.kmz


As for the question of a connection between nuclear power and nuclear weapons, here are two telling quotes from The Nuclear Energy Information Center.


"There is no technical demarcation between the military and civilian reactor and there never was one. What has persisted over the decades is just the misconception that such a linkage does not exist." ("Some Political Issues Related to Future Special Nuclear Fuels Production," LA- 8969-MS, UC-16).4

"The connections linking nuclear power and weapons is more than political or historic. Consider: l FISSIONABLE MATERIALS: It is the same nuclear fuel cycle with its mining of uranium, milling, enrichment and fuel fabrication stages which readies the uranium ore for use in reactors, whether these reactors are used to create plutonium for bombs or generate electricity. In the end, both reactors produce the plutonium. The only difference between them is the concentration of the various isotopes used in the fuel. Each year a typical 1000 mega-watt (MW) commercial power reactor will produce 300 to 500 pounds of plutonium -- enough to build between 25 - 40 Nagasaki-sized atomic bombs."

Hmmm. Well, at least I got some answers. What to do about all this (the tie-in between energy policy and national security is far deeper than simply nuclear) is another can of worms.

Now, I am about to go hear the Attorney General of Connecticut speak about Connecticut's role in the global warming debate. Should prove most interesting.

Thanks for tuning in.
Emily

Polar bears and Thomas Friedman

Well, there's nothing like Monday afternoon when you've skipped your morning class. Hey, to be fair, the weather last night was out of control - the walls of our apartment building were howling while rain pounded all the windows. I couldn't fall asleep until 4am - and right before I fell asleep I turned off my alarm clock. Anyways, now I am in my cozy building once more, and have decided to surf around for some energy and utility related news (while munching on my afternoon snack of Ghiradelli chocolate chips.)
In terms of news, first check out the website below - it is an interactive part of the New York Times website which allows you to view where campaign contributions to all potential presidential candidates are coming from - and how much each candidate has received. It is surprising to me that Obama is the #2 in most money recieved for his campaign so far. Obviously, Hilary Clinton is #1 and Romney is #3. I realize that this is not a politics blog, but I think that looking at this information is important. Or at least it is good to know that such information is out there, and accessible. You can see what corporations are giving to whom and make up your own mind as to whether it matters. I personally believe that there should be a law limiting the amount of money any candidate can receive from corporations, or maybe total. I mean, it goes to fund propaganda fuel hate wars between candidates. It also (maybe) allows certain lobby groups and corporations undue influence over politicians - at the very least it creates conflicts of interest. And although I do not want to doubt the principles of our politicians, it is wise to avoid creating financial conflicts of interest.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/2008_EG_FINANCES.html

Further articles to check out:

1. Myers, S. "Russia Tries to Save Polar Bears With Legal Hunt." Source: New York Times



This article contains an interesting debate - whether allowing some legalized hunting of endangered species, such as polar bears, will in fact aid in the survival of the species. The topic of polar bears is especially pertinent to Russia because melting ice and the subsequent reduced habitat has forced these animals inland. It has become harder for the polar bears to hunt seals because of the fewer ice islands - therefore polar bears are coming back into the mainland sooner than usual - and also venturing further in. This brings them into contact with people, and increases the risk of poaching. Polar bears are an interesting species at this juncture also because they are being considered for the endangered species list. If they are declared an endangered species then there is debate over how far the EPA and other agencies must go in order to protect them. This is ironic because global warming is linked to the degradation of polar bear habitat - is the US then legally obligated to take measures to stop global warming in order to save the polar bear? You can begin to see why environmental groups love this animal.

http://scienceblogs.com/strangerfruit/polar-bear.jpg


2. Friedman, T. "The Power of Green."


If you want to read a little environmental propaganda written by one of the greenest demagogues in the country - check out the above article. I actually saw Thomas Friedman speak this past summer in DC at the premier showing of his documentary. His speech and his rhetoric were very similar for this article, and it did inspire the green recesses of my heart. However, the problem with Friedman is that he often simplifies issues and he is adept at appealing to emotions rather than rationality when framing these issues. I mean, I agree with many of his points, but I try and see the deeper complexities underlying some of these situations. Additionally, Friedman is pro-nuclear, a stance which is (at the very least) worth maintaing skepticism towards. That being said, read it for yourself and make up your own minds. I just like to see a little healthy skepticism around here.

Best of luck for the upcoming week. - Emily

Belated Easter Present

Here is my belated Easter present to you all. It is in honor of the chocolate bunny my mom sent me.

The Jackpot for Procrastinators

I am about to give you the motherload of summer internship opportunities. So prepare yourself.


Here are the last of the few energy and utilities related internships still out there. If you are still procrastinating, I suggest you take a deep breath and fill out a couple of these applications. It certainly can't hurt, and may provide you with a nice little extra to put on your resume.

1. Try finding internships at Entergy - an engineering and utilties corporation (and a Fortune 500 company) who are hiring a few interns. They are looking for largely engineering majors with a GPA of over 3.0 They also seem, at first blush anyways, to be a socially and environmentally responsible company. If you care. Check out

2. Another, similarly minded utilities company - FirstEnergy. They have a bunch of internship opportunities *(paid) at the following website:


3. This is the real jackpot - especially for you guys who are interested in environmental issues. I just copied and pasted the following opportunites made available this summer by the Energy Action Coalition.

Description:
Energy Action Coalition Summer Opportunities
Ongoing Summer Internships & Opportunities:

Chesapeake Climate Action Network internships in Washington, DC -
mid-May to mid-August (flexible)
**to apply send resume, cover letter & (optional) writing sample to
internships@chesapeakeclimate.org
Internships available with our National, State, and Campus programs. In
your application please indicate your preferences.
More info - http://www.chesapeakeclimate.org/pages/page.cfm?page_id=78

Climate Summer
This summer we will awaken the conscience of our nation by calling for
transformative change to address the defining issues of our generation
- global warming and a clean and just energy transition. The 2008
presidential nomination process in Iowa and New Hampshire provides a
national platform to engage, shape, and elevate this vital public debate
on clean energy and global warming and the Sierra Student Coalition, the Sierra Club and partners from the Energy Action Coalition and the Carbon Coalition in Iowa and New Hampshire will do so by organizing statewide marches for change. Find out more and apply to join us at
http://www.climatesummer.org/

Mountain Justice Summer
Join the movement to fight Mountaintop removal coal mining and protect
the land and people of Appalachia this summer. There are volunteer
opportunities in Kentucky, Virginia, West Virginia, and Tennessee from
door-to-door listening projects to water testing, GIS mapping,
distribution of materials and more! If you can't come to Appalachia
this summer, you can also support MJS from home.
http://www.mountainjusticesummer.org/intake.php

Campaign to Save the Environment
Are you ready to roll up your sleeves and make a difference on
environmental issues? Do you want to stand up to the corporations that
are compromising the integrity of our democracy? Apply for paid positions with the Campaign to Save the Environment today (
http://www.jobsthatmatter.org/jtm.asp?id2=23293).

(Side note by Me - Don't do the internship listed above unless you are truly desperate and not afraid to work really, really hard. It is almost entirely fundraising efforts and I have heard some horror stories..)

Greenpeace internships in Washington DC and San Francisco
**to apply send resume, cover letter & writing sample to
interns@wdc.greenpeace.org interns@wdc.greenpeace.org
Internships available with the Greenpeace actions team, Grassroots dept, Greenpeace Organizing Term, Global Warming, Forests, Oceans, or Toxics campaigns, web and comms team, and others. Many positions filled by April, but send your info anyway!http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/about/jobs/internship

Summer Research Fellows - Sustainable Endowments Institute - June -
August, 2007

To apply send resume and cover letter to mark@endowmentinstitute.org.
Paid Summer Research Fellow positions available at the Sustainable
Endowments Institute office in Harvard Square, Cambridge, MA. Research Fellows will play a critical role in producing the 2008 College
Sustainability Report Card.
http://www.endowmentinstitute.org/

Summer Trainings & Events


Mountain Justice Summer Camp - May 20-27
Join the movement to fight Mountaintop removal coal mining and protect
the land and people of Appalachia this summer. Come to the MJS Training Camp to learn about Mountaintop Removal, learn skills, meet others who will be participating in MJS from around the country, and have fun! Then stay and be part of Mountain Justice Summer volunteer opportunities in Kentucky, Virginia, West Virginia, and Tennessee from door-to-door listening projects to water testing, GIS mapping, distribution of materials and more! http://www.mountainjusticesummer.org/intake.php
Greenpeace Organizing Term summer semester - applications due March 16, semester starts June 4

The Greenpeace Organizing Term is an action-packed semester of training and travel. Get the skills to protect the planet and get trained by the experts. You'll learn grassroots organizing, leadership, media skills, and campaign strategy. You'll climb, drive Greenpeace boats, and travel abroad to work with international activists. Apply online! Only a few spots are left for the Summer & Fall 2007 semesters and early applications deadline is approaching- February 28th. The semester is based in both the Washington D.C. and San Francisco Greenpeace offices. To contact program staff with questions, email got@wdc.greenpeace.org or call Diana Silbergeld at Greenpeace: 415-255-9221 x342. Summer semester starts June 4. http://www.greenpeace.org/got

Change It 2007 - July 20-26
All expenses paid, including travel and housing, week-long skills
training in Washington, DC. Accepted students will receive free travel to D.C. for training on campaign strategy, message development, lobbying,
recruitment, and event planning. Students will travel offsite to participate in a campaign event and will emerge from the program with the skills and tools they need to become effective leaders in the environmental and social justice movements. Last year's website: http://www.changeit06.org/ - 2007 site underway http://www.changeit07.org/ will go live on April 10. For more info, write to changeit@wdc.greenpeace.org or call Charlie Fredrick at 202-319-2468.

Energy Justice Summer-South - At the least June 20-25th
A week long training camp designed to build skills and leadership, and
plug youth into anti-nuclear community organizing in the southeast. We
also hope to bridge the gap between an aging generation of anti-nuclear
activists and the youth of today. This is a collaboration between the
Southern Energy Network, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, and the Energy Justice Network. For more information, please see http://www.energyjustice.net/ejs and/or contact south[at]energyjustice.net.

Energy Justice Summer-Ohio - All summer long, concentrated in a more
intensive skills and organizing camp at the end of June.
Come fight coal where coal needs fighting! Join Elisa Young and the
Meigs Community Action Network in a community with the densest patch of proposed coal-fired power plants in the nation, a proposed power line, and an active coal-mining operation that is destroying people's water and land. For more information, please see http://www.energyjustice.net/ejs and/or contact Matt - matt[at]energyjustice.net 215.743.4884.

http://www2.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gif

Comment:
There is not set application dead lines for these applications so please apply as soon as possible.

Contact Information:
Tom Owens
Email: tom@chesapeakeclimate.org

And, just because this is my blog, and I can do what I want - here is a picture of my favorite salad dressing. It is so incredibly delicious, it deserves a place here.

The First Nerd In Space

I am still working on how this connects to Energy and Utilities...but here is an awesome story to check out - picked up by BBC. A US billionaire, named Charles Simonyi, took off into space on a pleasure cruise - he paid $20 million dollars for the ride. The trip was arranged through a corporation known as "Space Adventures" which has sent 4 other private citizens into space. You can follow his trip on his blogging site called www.charlesinspace.com

Also, I finally found out about my summer grant - and the news was good, I got it. Which means I have to start figuring out the logistics, trying to find a house with a dishwasher and some fun roommates. Thank God for the reminder that despite cold temperatures, summer is only a few months away. And I will not be working at Slurpie Heaven.

Secondly, check out: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/629/629/6528979.stm
For one of the best websites on the world wide impacts of climate change I have ever seen.
And thirdly - enjoy your saturday. Im a gonna enjoy mine . And its only 2 o'clock.

Emily

Will the EPA finally get some teeth?

First of all, the Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the EPA can finally grow some teeth - ie. that it can regulate the emissions of greenhouse gases (the gases which trap heat inside of our atmosphere). This is huge. The issue at stake was whether such gases constitute "pollutants" and fall under the jurisdiction of the "Clean Air Act." The Bush Administration has long held that Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant and therefore is not subject to EPA regulation. This case (entitled Mass. vs. the EPA) arose when twelve states, including Wesleyan's home state of Connecticut, sued the EPA for not regulating greenhouse gases. Now that the Supreme Court has sided with the states, the EPA is required (or, free) to pursue CO2 regulation. In fact, if it does not, it may be subject to legal action. As can be expected, the vote was close - 5-4, with the more conservative judges contesting the fact that such a coalition of states and environmentalist groups should have been allowed to stand as plantiffs in the first place. Justice Scalia in particular has been attempting to raise the standing in environmental cases such as these. This court decision, as reported by the NY Times, is likely to be the most important environmental decision the court has made in recent years, and it will shape the legal and environmental landscape for year and years to come. It is of interest to note that the debate over this case concerned the viability of multi-state standing in court, not the viability of CO2 as a pollutant. In fact, all of the justices agreed that CO2 fit the definition of a pollutant under the Clean Air Act and that Global Warming is the result of anthropogenic activities. The justices were particularly swayed by evidence about the impacts of automobiles on CO2 emissions.



On the same page there is a discussion board with the question, "Do rich countries have an obligation to help poorer countries bear the cost of global warming?"

Implicit in this question is the hypothesis (scientifically founded) that global warming will disproportionately affect the global south and Africa. There are a few countries which may benefit - including Russia. Just something to mull over.

Additionally, here was a pertinent article on the front page of the New York Times this morning which I suggest you all check out. It is entitled, "No Longer Waiting for Rain, an Arid West Takes Action." Of course, much of the action mentioned is court action, Montana is suing Wyoming in the US Supreme Court over water rights. We tend to forget that supporting large populations in the West creates huge water demands. Water demands which can no longer be met by just the Colorado River. Not that this should be news to anyone - the Colorado River has been shrinking in size decade by decade - it used to flow almost all the way down to Mexico. Seven states rely on water from the Colorado River - which means relying on water from yearly snow melt. However, global warming (severe drought is forcasted for the West) and rapidly expanding populations may conspire to complicate the picture.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/04/us/04drought.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin


Anyways, that's all your getting out of me today - buts its an exciting time to be following energy concerns. I hear about my grant in the next few days, so everyone wish me luck....

Emily