<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<!--
  Hey!
  This web page is actually a data file that is meant to be
  read by RSS reader programs.
  To learn more, visit http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/04/30/qa.html
  Or to download a feed reader of your own, 
  check out the terrific SharpReader: http://www.sharpreader.net/index.html
-->
<channel>
	<title>the Clean Air blog: global warming</title>
	<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/</link>
	<description>the Clean Air blog</description>
	<language>en-us</language>
	<managingEditor>blog@iwantcleanair.com</managingEditor>
	<webMaster>blog@iwantcleanair.com</webMaster>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:01:56 PST</pubDate>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:01:56 PST</lastBuildDate>
	<ttl>15</ttl>
	<copyright>copyright (c) 2007 the Clean Air blog</copyright>
	<generator>BlogFusion 4.0 - www.blogfusion.com</generator>
	
	

	<item>
		<title>Green Cars</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=736</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Jonathan Goodwin is using off-the-shelf technology to turn Hummers from lumbering gas-guzzlers into swift and thrifty eco-cars.He uses a combination of biodiesel fuel, hybrid-electric motors and hydrogen injection to get performance and economy out of his tricked out rides.  And his customers include Governor Swarzenneger and Neil Young.The feature article in Fast Company is a great read and ultimate asks the question... if this mechanic in Kansas can do this with off-the-shelf technology and a small team of mechanics, why can't the Detroit car makers with their billions in capital and thousands of employees?]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:21:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=736&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>New Green Computing Standards</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=629</link>
		<description><![CDATA[According to the IDC Worldwide Quarterly PC Tracker published in September 2006, there will be nearly 260 million personal computers shipped in 2007.  On July 20th,  more stringent ENERGY STAR standards for computers and monitors went into effect ensuring that American consumers have access to the latest information about products that meet minimum requirements for energy efficiency. According to the ENERGY STAR website, &amp;quot;ENERGY STAR delivers the technical information and tools that organizations and consumers need to choose energy-efficient solutions and best management practices. ENERGY STAR has successfully delivered energy and cost savings across the country, saving businesses, organizations, and consumers about $14 billion in 2006 alone.&amp;quot;The new computing standards are part of an upgrade to the entire Office Equipment sector.One resource for finding computers that meet or exceed the ENERGY STAR standard is epeat.net.  Here you will find two desktop models (from Dell and HP) that are gold level achievers for environmental standards (EPEAT measures many criteria including energy efficiency).    This might be a good place to gather information before purchasing you next computer.]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jul 2007 07:48:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=629&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Rupert Murdoch: Duty to the Future</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=561</link>
		<description><![CDATA[&amp;quot;Climate change poses clear, catastrophic threats. We may not agree on the extent, but we certainly can't afford the risk of inaction.&amp;quot;  -  Rupert Murdoch, Conservative.  He is Chairman and CEO of News Corp, which owns FoxNews, the New York Post and a worldwide media empire.On May 10th,  Rupert Murdoch announced in a full-page, front of section editorial in the New York Post titled &amp;quot;A Duty to the Future&amp;quot;, a corporate committment to a series of initiatives on Global Warming.  Firstly, the multinational media company will be carbon-neutral in less than three years.  More importantly, they will leverage their media empire to bring change beyond their corporate activities.  They will ensure that the content of their media outlets is presented with an awareness to realities of Global Warming.  This is huge.  As Amanda Griscom Little points out on Grist.org...  &amp;quot;When Rupert Murdoch, the cantankerous and conservative owner of Fox News, enthusiastically joins the fight against climate change, you know we're past the tipping point on the issue. Think landslide.&amp;quot;  This is a man who has been a staunch supporter of very conservative politicians.  His past donations have help put some of the most out-of-touch skeptics into office.  Moving forward, he told Grist,  an understanding of the reality of Global Warming will be a &amp;quot;litmus test&amp;quot; for his political support.  Murdoch is correct when he says, &amp;quot;the climate problem won't be solved by one company reducing its emissions to zero, nor by one government acting alone. It won't be solved without mass participation by the general public in countries around the globe.&amp;quot;   So, while it is great news that News Corp will become carbon-neutral, it is even better news that they will be working to reduce the carbon footprint of their audience.    I wonder how long it will be before Sean Hannity apologizes for his prior obstruction of progress on this issue.  Or better yet, maybe he'll be shown the door and we can be liberated from his awful spin.  Then we can get on with fulfilling our duty to the future.]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 00:00:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=561&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Gore Gets Solar Panels</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=529</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The Gore family residence won an appeal with their local zoning board that will allow them to install solar panels on their Tennessee home.   Don't expect an apology from the right-wing smear machine, but this furhter debunks one of their latest propaganda campaigns.Conservative operatives had ignited a media storm just after Al Gore won an academy award for his film An Inconvenient Truth by fabricating a story about his electricity usage at his Tennessee home.   They claimed he was a hypocrite because his electric consumption was high.Even though their story was factually incorrect and philosophically unsupportable, it spread through the media.The Gores have been supporting renewable energy through free-market based strategies of purchasing power through green programs.  After winning the appeal with their local zoning board, the Gores will be allowed to install an array of solar panels which will produce clean energy for decades.Sources:MSNBCBill Hobbs]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:45:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=529&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Step It Up</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=519</link>
		<description><![CDATA[This April 14th, tens of thousands of Americans will gather all across the country at meaningful, iconic places to call for action on climate change. We will hike, bike, climb, walk, swim, kayak, canoe, or simply sit or stand with banners of our call to action:  Step it Up Congress!!!  Cut carbon 80% by 2050. Learn more at www.stepitup2007.org]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantCleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2007 10:46:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=519&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Universities as Greenwash Tool?</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=495</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Regular readers of this blog know that we often comment on stories about the acceptance of global warming in the business community and the things that global corporations are doing in the battle to prevent catastrophic climate change.  Generally, the movement in the business community is a positive thing as it brings the world's capital into ventures that are seeking to provide effective weapons against the very real threats to the environment and human society.  Even many of the big oil companies seem to have accepted reality, and are funding research into solutions.  As our friend Bill Walker at the Envrironmental Working Group's Enviroblog points out, the line gets a little blurry when the corporations are funding research at leading universities.  At issue is whether universities can maintain independence when funds are coming directly from corporate checkbooks.  I am right there with Bill when he says, &amp;quot;once I would have automatically and vociferously denounced anything that smelled of greenwashing. But it certainly is right that the companies that created the global warming crisis help bankroll the search for solutions,&amp;quot;  and that universities must &amp;quot;build in rigorous safeguards against corporate influence.&amp;quot;       Read more at Enviroblog The question, it seems to me, is whether BP's money will fund real research that is scientifically valid and academically open.   Update:  UC publication Berkeleyan has an in depth look at the Energy Biosciences Institute.
 Some prior posts on business and global warming  On the US Climate Partnership   On Richard Branson and Virgin  On Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson ]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 10:19:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=495&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Evangelicals and Global Warming</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=487</link>
		<description><![CDATA[In today's NY Times...&amp;quot;The board of the National Association of Evangelicals has rebuffed leaders of  the Christian right who had called for the association to silence or dismiss its  Washington policy director because of his involvement in the campaign against global  warming.&amp;quot;The group is being pressured by conservatives and Republicans like James Dobson to fire the Reverend Richard Cizik, the groups Washington policy director,  for his work with evangelicals on the issue of Global Warming.&amp;ldquo;There&amp;rsquo;s one Lord, but not just one issue,&amp;rdquo; said one board member, the Rev. Paul de Vries, president of the New York Divinity School. &amp;ldquo;I am as much against abortion as Jim Dobson and the others, but I want that baby to live in a healthful environment, inside the womb as well as outside of the womb.&amp;rdquo;Source:  NY Times]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantCleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:00:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=487&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Drought for Some, Flooding for Others</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=488</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Next month, the International Panel on Climate Change will release the second in a series of four reports on Global Warming.  The Associated Press has published some of the findings in advance, and it does not paint a pretty picture.
The harmful effects of global warming on daily life are already showing up, and within a couple of decades hundreds of millions of people will not have enough water, top scientists are likely to say next month at a meeting in Belgium.
At the same time, tens of millions of others will be flooded out of their homes each year as the earth reels from rising temperatures and sea levels, according to portions of a draft of an international scientific report by the authoritative Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Tropical diseases like malaria will spread. By 2050, polar bears will mostly be found in zoos, their habitats gone. Pests like fire ants will thrive.
Of course the wacko wing of the Republican party will find the handful of scientists who express some skepticism on Global Warming to serve their obstructionist policies.  The rest of us should be doing all we can to battle this rising threat.
Source:  San Francisco Chronicle]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantCleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2007 00:00:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=488&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Conservatives and Global Warming</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=470</link>
		<description><![CDATA[A reader recently wrote to ask why there is such push on Global Warming, both on the site and in society in general.   I was asked,  &amp;quot;everyone agrees that pollution of the air we breathe is bad, why not stick with working on plain old air pollution?&amp;quot;  First of all, I think that the premise of choosing one or the other is a false premise.  We can work to protect the air we breath AND work to limit Greenhouse gasses.  We can do both, while growing our economy and producing well-paying jobs.Second, I wish everyone agreed about pollution and the air we breathe. I actually think that more people agree on Global Warming than on other types of air pollution.  Not every one agrees that we should make the air as clean as humanly possible.  For example, while President Bush has been really great on promoting alternative fuels, his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has consistently performed poorly on air pollution issues.  The EPA has controverted their own scientists on mercury, soot and other pollution regulations.Meanwhile, Global Warming is accepted by nearly everyone... from a wide agreement in the Scientific community (through peer-reviewed publications and the IPCC) to a building consensus in the business community.   Did you know that... Hank Paulson, the US Treasury Secretary (and former CEO of Goldman Sachs) firmly understands the threat of Global Warming and thinks we should be doing something about it.  Paul Wolfowitz, President of the World Bank, is working to ensure that the World Bank takes climate concerns into account in their development projects.Richard Branson is putting considerable effort (money) into revamping his Virgin empire to produce and use fuels that have less Global Warming impact.President Bush acknowledged &amp;quot;global climate change&amp;quot; in his State of the Union speech and described some things we should be doing about it.Recently a group called the US Climate Action Partnership was launched.  It consists of some of America's largest companies from all sectors. (Including DuPont, GE, BP, and PG&amp;amp;E) These are not socialist hippie-freaks who have smoked one too many.  These are conservatives and business leaders.  To be sure, there are skeptics. Yet somehow, Michael Crichton (a science fiction writer) does not carry as much weight as George Bush (the President) or a VP of ExxonMobile (a major Greenhouse Gas producer).Its true.  Even Exxon Mobil has publicly acknowledged Global Warming as real, and as a human caused challenge that we must do something about.  From a recent Houston Chronicle article...
Big Oil behemoth Exxon Mobil Corp. has dropped any pretense of questioning whether global warming is real. Now the company is seeking to position itself as an active player in efforts to lower greenhouse gases.&amp;quot;The appropriate debate isn't on whether climate is changing, but rather should be on what we should be doing about it,&amp;quot; Kenneth Cohen, Exxon's vice president of public affairs, told reporters on a conference call Thursday.
I predict that Exxon's funding of Global Warming skeptics will soon dry up and there will be fewer talking points swirling around about Al Gore's mansion, and how the scientists once predicted an Ice Age, and how the graph below is somehow within the range of natural variability.

So,  why is the &amp;quot;global warming&amp;quot; angle is being pushed SO hard?  I think it is because the consequences of climate change are enormous and potentially catastrophic.  Loss of life, loss of habitat, loss of food production capacity, loss of capital (mostly in real estate), loss of our way of life.  The situation is really worse than you think.  Hopefully it is not too late.]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:22:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=470&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Man Bites Dog...</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=428</link>
		<description><![CDATA[...And DuPont is in a coalition with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) to stop Global Warming.  Who would ever have imagined that?  All it took was the complete ignorance of the Bush Administration on the issue of Global Warming, and now even large industrial companies are standing up and calling for some leadership from Washington.It is now absolutely clear that President Bush and his Republican party supporters are out-of-touch with the mainstream.Recently, the CEOs of 10 of America's largest companies joined forces with NRDC, Environmental Defense and other environmental groups to put pressure on the president to activate the federal government on the issue of global warming.President Bush has kept the US out of the global effort to reduce the  human pollution that is driving planetary climate change.  The US Climate Action Partnership was formed to urge the federal government to enact legislation requiring significant reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.   The list of companies involved is startling in that it contains the 2nd largest company in America (General Electric), several utilities (Duke, FPL, PNM and PG&amp;amp;E), an oil company (BP America), industrials (DuPont, Caterpiller and Alcoa) and a financial services company (Lehman Brothers).This is not Ben and Jerry's together with Birkenstock.   We are talking about major capital turning to Washington and saying that the government needs to step in and regulate global warming emissions.Our friends at Ecological Hope have a good summary of this story and links. ]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:22:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=428&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>End of Oil?</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=390</link>
		<description><![CDATA[What if Americans switched to driving cars that use plug-in hybrid technology?  The US Department of Energy (DOE) has studied the question and has concluded that &amp;quot;off-peak&amp;quot; electricity production and transmission capacity could fuel 84 percent of the country's 220 million vehicles if they were plug-in hybrid electrics.Today's hybrid vehicles, like Toyota's Prius, use electric motors and batteries to improve the overall performance of the automobile.  Plug-in hybrids  go one step further by allowing the vehicle to be charged overnight using a standard plug, and by providing enough storage and power to run in electric mode for longer rides.   &amp;quot;Since gasoline consumption accounts for 73 percent of imported oil, it is intriguing to think of the trade and national security benefits if our vehicles switched from oil to electrons,&amp;quot; added PNNL energy researcher Rob Pratt. &amp;quot;Plus, since the utilities would be selling more electricity without having to build more plants or power lines, electricity prices could go down for everyone.&amp;quot;Some electric utilities are very enthusiastic.  Pacific Gas and Electric has encouraged its customers to sign a petition to automakers urging them to make plug-in hybrids available.]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 10:13:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=390&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Supreme Court to Hear Greenhouse Gas Case </title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=366</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments in a case brought by a coalition of US states, counties, cities and citizen's groups against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the agency's lack of action on greenhouse gas pollution.  The Clean Air Act clearly requires the government to regulate emissions that &amp;quot;may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.''  The law includes climate and weather in its definition of welfare.  The law does not require certainty (although certainty on this issue is easy to come by).If the Supreme Court finds that the EPA is acting illegally, the US would be required to begin regulating and minimizing emissions of global warming gasses.  A ruling is not expected until next summer.A recent C-Span broadcast, summarized over at BlueClimate.com, gives a glimpse into the arguments that may be made in the case.   The plaintiffs point out that the plain language of the law requires the EPA to act.  The defendants do not try to address the law, but present technical arguments.]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2006 09:37:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=366&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Wells Fargo Commits to Renewable Energy</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=309</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Add Wells Fargo to the list of companies that understand the need for renewable energy.  Seeing the potential catastrophe of global warming and the weakness of continued addiction to fossil fuels, the company is now the largest purchaser of renewable energy in the United States.The purchase will offset 40 percent of Wells Fargo&amp;rsquo;s electricity consumption with 100 percent Green-e certified wind energy. It will help develop renewable energy and prevent the emission of 380,000 tons of carbon dioxide each year, the equivalent of reducing the CO2 emissions of 75,000 cars annually or by reducing the equivalent CO2 emissions associated with 40,000,000 gallons of gasoline each year.source:  Green Biz]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2006 14:02:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=309&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Alaska&apos;s Bering Sea Too Warm, Fisheries Dying</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=301</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The Bering Sea is often called the &amp;quot;Fish Basket&amp;quot; because it produces half of all the seafood catch in the United States.  The fisheries there are estimated to have an economic value of $1.7 billion.   When such an economic engine begins to falter, people notice.   Since most of the economic activity moves through the city of Seattle, it is logical for the local paper to know a thing or two about what is going on.In an extensive report, the Seattle Times describes the science and the economics of an ocean ecosystem suffering changes brought, in part, by global warming.  The Bering Sea, which is between Russia's Siberia and Alaska, has traditionally been covered by seasonal sea ice extending deep into the southern portion of the sea.  The extent of sea ice has been retreating.  Sea ice does not form as far south as it used to, and what does form is melting more quickly.   The average annual temperature in the region has increased at twice the global rate.According to the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment , unless carbon-dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions from cars and industry are sharply curbed, the average on land temperatures in the area are expected to increase by 5 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit over the next century.  Temperatures over the northern oceans are predicted to increase by up to 13 degrees.Animals and plants that depend on the ice formations are already experiencing dramatic disruptions.  Half a million migratory birds died in 1997 after their annual 9000 mile trek from Australia because they could not feed due to an unprecedented algae bloom.   Seals that birth and nest on ice floes are in decline.  The snow crab fishery has declined by 85% since the year 2000.    When the conditions that created this fertile and productive system change, the outcomes will change.  Species will struggle, migrate away or disappear.  Others, usually less productive,  will invade.  Whether we can rely upon the bounty of this particular ocean to continue to feed us is in serious doubt. ]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:59:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=301&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>California Global Warming Solutions Act Becomes Law</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=295</link>
		<description><![CDATA[The San Francisco Chronicle, the Oakland Tribune, and LA Times  all have positive articles covering the California Global Warming Solutions Act which was signed into law by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Wednesday. This law symbolizes a great turning point for our country, our culture, our species and our planet.  On the surface, it is a great victory in the battle to protect the life-sustaining systems on the planet.  It is the start of a process that brings a large portion of America into cooperation with the world in seeking solutions to the threat of global warming.A parallel story is that we may have just witnessed a dramatic turing point in American politics.  As we have mentioned earlier, the California leaders of the two parties worked together to implement a viable solution to a problem that a vast majority of the population wants to see solved.   This is true democracy and our nation's founders would be proud.Joining Gov. Schwarzenegger on San Francisco's Treasure Island for the signing ceremony were Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez and San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome (Democrats),  New York Governor George Pataki (Republican), and (via satellite) British Prime Minister  Tony Blair (Labour).Last week the Schwarzenegger hosted New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (Republican) on a tour of alternative energy facilities in California.  As Schwarzenegger had previously said, &amp;quot;it&amp;rsquo;s amazing the work that can be done for the people of California when Democrats and Republicans work together.&amp;quot;And are California businesses upset?  Not Pacific, Gas &amp;amp; Electric (PG&amp;amp;E), the state's largest electric utility.  Tom King, President and CEO of PG&amp;amp;E said that this is  &amp;quot;the right thing to do for California and the right thing to do for our nation... Climate change is the defining environmental challenge of our generation.&amp;quot;As we move closer to the November elections, lets all do what we can to remove those in power who have been dividing our nation by placing party above country, politics above truth, and profit above humanity.]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2006 23:52:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=295&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Cleaner and Cheaper Transportation</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=291</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG&amp;amp;E) is asking its 5.1 million customers to petition automakers to speed up development of plug-in electric-gasoline hybrid vehicles.  In an insert to their electric bill, the company is encouraging customers to visit PlugInPartners.org and make a pledge to buy such an environmentally friendly vehicle.   Plug-in hybrids are feasible and have been demonstrated by converting regular hybrid vehicles, such as the Toyota Prius.  Extra batteries are added to provide extra power and distance in electric-only mode.  These batteries can be refueled using a regular household electrical outlet.  According to EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute), half the cars on U.S. roads are driven 25 miles a day or less. Consequently, a plug-in hybrid with a 25-mile all electric range could eliminate gasoline use in the daily commute of tens of millions of Americans.   The PlugInPartners.org petition states: &amp;ldquo;If I could buy a vehicle that was cheaper to operate, cleaner, ran on domestic electricity, and I could buy it from you for a few thousand dollars more, yes I would positively WANT to plug it in to a 120-volt outlet.&amp;rdquo;   PG&amp;amp;E is California's largest utility.    source: San  Diego Union Tribune]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2006 11:40:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=291&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Virgin Mega-brand to Combat Global Warming</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=284</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Richard Branson, the billionaire business mogul, has pledged $3 billion to combat global warming.    Here is how AP has it...  Branson, the billionaire behind the multi-platform Virgin brand, said the money would come from 100 percent of the profits generated by his transportation and airline sectors. It will then be invested in efforts to find renewable, sustainable energy sources in an effort to wean the world off of oil and coal.  Branson made the announcement while at the Clinton Global Initiative.    With former president Clinton at his side, Branson said, &amp;quot;our generation has inherited an incredibly beautiful world from our parents and they from their parents.  We must not be the generation responsible for irreversibly damaging the environment.&amp;quot;  Details of how the money will be used are still not fully clear.  But, as John Sauven, campaign director of Greenpeace, said, &amp;quot;three billion dollars is a lot of money in anyone's books, and this gesture has to be welcomed as a valuable addition in the fight against climate change.  Not all of us have the resources of Richard Branson.  But we all can do our part by ensuring that we heat, cool, and light our homes and offices with the most efficient products available.  Our Clean Air shop can help you do that.]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2006 11:38:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=284&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Lawsuit is Wake Up Call to Auto Industry</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=283</link>
		<description><![CDATA[When a manufacturer's product causes billions of dollars in damage, it stands to reason that someone will sue for restitution. 

This is exactly what the state of California is doing, having filed a lawsuit against the world's largest automakers. 

Automobiles are a major contributor to human-caused global warming, and the industry has resisted efforts to improve efficiency and lower emissions.  Now states, counties and municipalities are left with ever growing financial liabilities as water supplies dwindle, the health of the general population is affected by ozone pollution, and shorelines are eroded.

In the auto industry, Toyota and Honda lead while GM and Ford are struggling.  This is, in part, due to the fact that the American manufacturers have been steadfast in their denial of the problem.  They continue to chant their wacky mantra... "consumers want gas-guzzler cars" while Toyota and Honda provide what people really want... high quality vehicles that optimize gas mileage while reducing emissions.

Toyota has a market capitalization ($175 Billion) that is ten time higher than GM ($17.5 Billion).  This is because they make more money (net income of $12.6 Billion for Toyota vs. a loss of $11.5 Billion for GM) selling cars that people want.


If successful, this lawsuit may even save the struggling US auto companies from themselves by forcing them to wake up to the reality of today's marketplace.
]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2006 08:02:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=283&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Al Gore Delivers Bold Speech</title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=281</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Many of the world's politicians have been in New York this week to deliver addresses to the opening of the current session of the United Nations.  

One former politician was in town and delivered a dramatic address on his favorite issue.  Al Gore spoke at the NYU Law School and had harsh words for George Bush, the administration and the Republican leadership in Congress for their failures on global warming.

He also described ways we can begin to make the changes necessary to avoid what scientists predict to be a massive catastrophe.

Read the full speech here.

]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 21:05:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=281&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
	<item>
		<title>Survey says... </title>
		<link>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=280</link>
		<description><![CDATA[There have been several interesting polls and surveys completed recently.  The results show widespread concern about global warming.  

A CBSNews/New York Times survey shows that a majority of Americans see global warming as a treat to the United States.  

This poll was conducted in mid-August, and the results show that nearly 67 percent of Americans believe that global warming is "an environmental problem that is having serious impact now."  Concern exists even among Republicans, whose national leadership have denied the seriousness of the problem.  61% of Republicans feel that global warming is either "somewhat serious" or "very serious."

Asked whether we should be taking action, the survey shows that 76% of Americans  think that "it is necessary to take steps to counter the effects of global warming right away."  

Similar results were reported in a TIME/ABC News/Stanford University poll published in March 2006, where "most people see global warming worsening â¬ and want action."

This poll also showed that most Americans are confused about whether scientists agree on the issue of global warming.  In spite of the fact that there is unanimous consensus that global warming is happening and human-caused among scientists who publish in peer-reviewed journals,  64% of Americans think "scientists disagree with one another about global warming."  

Such confusion indicates a complete and total failure on the part of the media to truthfully and objectively deliver information to the people.

According to The Independent, a survey of US media articles, in contrast with the one on scientific papers, found a majority cast doubt on the reality of global warming.  As the source of information, the media control the perceptions of most Americans.  

Here is one recent example of how it works:  Tucker Carlson a journalist on MSNBC claimed "[t]he world is getting warmer," but we don't know "why" because "[t]here's no consensus on that."  

The truth is that there is a unanimous consensus among scientists that global warming is human caused.  If this consensus view does not make Tucker Carlson happy, he should abide by his journalistic ethics and put the truth before his own personal fantasies.]]></description>
		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>
		<author>blog@iwantcleanair.com (IwantcleanAir)</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 19:51:00 PST</pubDate>
		<comments>http://www.iwantcleanair.com/index.cfm?CommentID=280&#35;comments</comments>
		
		
		
	</item>
	
</channel>
</rss>
