Anybody Interested in Stopping the Proposed Oil and Gas Leasing of the Outer Continental Shelf?

Is anybody out there interested in stopping the proposed 2010-2015 Oil and Gas Leasing in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)? The US Department of the Interior's (DOI) Secretary Ken Salazar has already held 2, and will be holding 2 more public hearings around the US. If you cannot atttend, you can watch the meeting via live webcast. The next 2 meetings will be held this coming Tuesday in Anchorage, and Thursday in New Orleans, so please spread the word quickly!

The DOI is accepting public comment via e-mail, postal and personal delivery. This is a direct quote from them:
"The MMS is seeking comment on all aspects of the new program including energy development and economic and environmental issues in the OCS areas. Comments are also requested on the specific subjects of size, timing, and location of sales and on the issues of buffer zones, revenue-sharing, and the use of unitization to limit the number of structures. The public comment period is open until September 21, 2009, pursuant to Secretary Salazar’s announcement on February 10, 2009."

You can watch videos and see Power Point presentations of the 2 already-concluded meetings, as well as get contact information from their website:
http://www.doi.gov/ocs/

So, all bloggers, please write or go to the meetings to oppose this proposed program! You can send e-comments here: http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=SubmitComment&o=09000064808e9d16
You are required to state your name, address and e-mail. If you want your name and/or addresses removed from public record, you need to state this at the beginning of your comment (limitations may apply, so read their rules). Here is my comment and you're welcome to copy any or all of this:

PLEASE WITHHOLD BOTH MY E-MAIL AND HOME ADDRESSES FROM THE PUBLIC RECORD, THANK YOU!

My name is _______________, United States citizen, and I am writing to oppose off-shore drilling and exploration, in the person of the 2010-2015 Oil and Gas Leasing in the Outer Continental Shelf proposed program. The original reasons for prohibiting offshore drilling (not to mention drilling in ANWR) have not changed. Think about tourism, real estate values, pollution that destroys ecosystems, our climate, and the security of our food supply. Now, put all of this in the same thoughts as offshore drilling and spills. (Spills can be caused by equipment breakdowns; natural disasters like hurricanes; deliberate acts such as terrorism, vandalism, illegal dumping, or war; and just plain, old accidents.) Obviously, they are not compatible.

Remember the Exxon Valdez disaster, anyone? This ship ran aground in March of 1989, spilling 11 million gallons of oil into Prince William Sound. This spill killed tens of thousands of wildlife and fouled approximately 1,300 miles of beaches and surface water. It only took this one accident to create the worst environmental disaster in history. Fishermen have lost everything, homeowners have polluted land, and many Native Americans have lost their traditional way of life. All the while, the 20-year-old class-action lawsuit against wealthy Exxon is still being dragged through the courts, postponed indefinitely by Exxon Corp.’s expensive legal maneuvers to avoid settlement payments. Valdez, Alaska is still recovering. Are we really now willing to risk yet another accident?

Offshore drilling will also not magically solve the oil crisis, but it will forever change an ecosystem. Experts state the oil will not reach the market for approximately 10 years. This, obviously, will not help us now. Also, let’s not forget that oil companies have untapped reserves. Think about why they're not tapping into what they already have readily available, yet are asking us to open up yet more avenues for them to increase their profits!

As for this offshore oil helping to reduce oil prices, that’s absolutely ridiculous. The United States has only 4% of the world’s oil. Any person, company, or country that owns or controls 4% of anything, has no real power to change prices or policies. Whatever happened to common sense? The United States of America does NOT set oil prices. OPEC member nations set oil prices. The USA is not a member of OPEC, so we do NOT have any influence in setting oil prices.

Instead of spending all this time and energy on oil and gas, why aren’t we pursuing clean, renewable and sustainable energy? Could the answer possibly be the ecosystem-destroying, climate-changing, lethal combination of billions of oil and gas company product defense dollars and political influence and corruption? Hopefully, American citizens are smart enough to not be duped by the public relations of product defense that is full of lies meant to benefit and sustain the incredibly rich and powerful energy industries. Big Oil and Gas will simply do whatever it takes to keep their wealth and power.

In conclusion, I absolutely oppose the continuation of a business-as-usual energy policy, found in the current guise of the 2010-2015 Oil and Gas Leasing in the Outer Continental Shelf proposed program, that will negatively impact marine ecosystems and the environment (by indirectly increasing both greenhouse gases and the rate of climate change), and threaten the security of our food supply. Thank you for your consideration.

1 in 4 Mammals May Become Extinct - Our World and Our Own Survival is in Crisis

Almost 25% of all mammals are threatened with extinction. We must do something now! The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has just completed their first detailed study in over a decade, looking at the mammals of our planet. This study was conducted over a 5-year period, by over 1,700 scientists, 11,000 volunteer scientists, and over 1,000 government and non-governmental organizations from over 160 countries around the world.

Their dire prediction is that 20.8%, a little over 1 out of 5 of all the world's mammals are surrently at risk for extinction! The IUCN, which is based in Switzerland, has red-listed 44,838 as threatened species, out of which 16,928 are endangered, 8,912 species are at risk for extinction, and 3,246 are facing imminent extinction. Since there are some mammals for which there is little data, whose numbers have not been counted possibly due to extremely low numbers, the actual number is probably close to 25% or 1 in 4.

Since 1500, there have been approximately 76 species of mammals that have become extinct. The fact that the number of mammals facing extinction has increased exponentially is due directly to our management and use of the world's lands, oceans and animals, as well as our contribution to global warming and climate change. Some of the causes of this mass extinction are habitat loss, deforestation, hunting, poaching, the international pet trade, accidental death-by-net and vessel strike for matine animals, and climate change. I personally would add pollution/poisoning of the ecosystem as another cause of extinction. The larger primates are at the most risk because they require larger areas for their habitats than do smaller mammals. If you would like to know more about the IUCN study on mammal extinction, go to http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/10/06/endangered.mammals.ap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
or get it directly from IUCN at
http://www.iucn.org/news_events/events/congress/index.cfm

An on-line article about endangered turtles on MSNBC reported that 40% of all species of mammals in China are endangered. They state that this is due to hunting and pollution. This problem is pervasive and certainly not limited to China. The question is, what are YOU going to do about this? We must ALL get together on this to save the mammals of our planet. If we lose 25% of all known species of mammals, this will have far-reaching effects that will quickly filter down to other species, and will ultimately, radically change our own lives, and possibly impact our own survival as a species. When you are talking about the extinction of the larger, top predatory species, you disrupt the trophic cascade. To understand the depth of impact this will have you should follow the studies of the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone National Park. Part of the positive impact of their return to that environment has included the literal change in the course of tributaries, caused the creation of new wetlands, and increased the diversity of species now found in Yellowstone. Combine the results of the IUCN study of mammals with what we already know about the enormous amount of ALL other species that are threatened, endangered and critically at risk for extinction. I believe our environment, as we know it, is at risk. Therefore, so is our own fragile survival as a species.

We have exploited, destroyed, killed competitors for land to extinction, polluted, and covered with concrete, a huge amount of our habitable land areas. We have polluted a large amount of the potable water of this world, which is less than 1% of all the water found on Earth. We have polluted the world's oceans and have overfished a large percentage of our marine food supply. I could go on and on. When you really look at what is happening, it is obvious that our decision-tree as humans should include everything that will save our environment and exclude that which threatens our environment in any way. Basically, we are down to the question of, what are we as a species willing to do and give up to survive? For instance, "Drill, Baby, Drill" is about as irresponsible and stupid a thing to do as I can imagine. Hmmm, profits or survival as a species?

A really interesting study was done by Jared Diamond that looked at the causes of the extinction of past civilizations, such as the Maya and Anasazi. He looked at the following five major factors that he believes contribute to the decline and/or collapse of a civilization: 1) environmental damage and population growth, 2) climate change, 3)hostile neighbors, 4) weakened trade partners, 5) and failure to solve social problems. If you are interested in Diamond's Case Study watch his lecture at UC Santa Barbara at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bc4bXIg8JDk
Here's a link to his graph embedded in a NY Times article about Diamond's research on the decline of civilizations
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/25/science/25diam.html