LONDON, England (CNN) -- Scientists think they have uncovered conclusive proof that human activity is responsible for rising temperatures in both polar regions.

Research carried out at the Climatic Research Unit at the UK's University of East Anglia (UEA) demonstrates for the first time that anthropogenic climate change is responsible for warming at the Arctic and Antarctic.

Previous studies have observed rises in temperature at both poles, but none, until now, have formally attributed the cause to human activity.

Using up-to-date gridded data sets, scientists led by the UEA observed mean land surface temperatures in the Arctic over a 100 year period. For the Antarctic the observation period was shorter -- 50 years -- as there is no station data available before 1945.

They then applied an average simulated response using two models. The first examined natural forcings -- events like solar cycles and volcanic activity which can affect temperatures.

The second model simulated natural combined with anthropogenic forcings -- which included greenhouse gases, stratospheric ozone depletion and sulphate aerosol.

Scientists discovered that the observed changes in Arctic and Antarctic temperatures are not consistent with internal climate variability or natural climate drivers alone.

One of the report authors, Dr Alexey Karpechko told CNN: "In both cases the accelerations are not consistent with natural forcing, which means that natural forcing alone cannot produce such a warming. So in a sense, we can say conclusively that this [warming trend at the poles] is due to human influence."

The paper "Attribution of polar warming to human influence" is published in the science journal Nature Geoscience.

The Antarctic data is of particular interest given that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fourth Assessment Report in 2007 notes that anthropogenic climate change had been detected in every continent except Antarctica.

This new data appears to demonstrate that man-made warming is indeed happening on the continent as well.

The report may go some way towards silencing climate skeptics who point to evidence that most of Antarctica has been cooling for some time.

"There is strong warming in the Antarctic peninsula," Karpechko said. "But for several decades there has been a slight cooling of the rest of the continent. This slight cooling is due to circulation changes which are partly caused by ozone depletion.

"This is why there has been a bit of confusion as to what is happening in Antarctica. But we expect a recovery of the ozone layer in the future. We may also expect that the Antarctic warming trends will emerge more clearly."

Commenting on the study conducted by the UEA, Professor David Vaughan, a Glaciologist at the British Antarctic Survey told CNN: "This is exactly the sort of study we need. The poles are extremely important in the climate change debate and the rapid warming in the Arctic is one of the icons."

Professor Vaughan, who is studying the patches of warming happening in Antarctica, concedes that the cooling that's occurred in the past 30 to 50 years is "a little perplexing". But he agrees with Dr Karpechko over the effects of the ozone hole.

"The likelihood is that over the next century the ozone hole will be substantially reduced," Professor Vaughan said, "And it may mean that the Antarctic warming becomes much more apparent in that period."

Climate modeling might not convince everyone that warming is taking place, but as Professor Vaughan points out: "Simulations are built around physical principles and an understanding of the physical world".

Climate modeling is a relatively new area of expertise but Professor Vaughan said that the UEA is widely recognized as one of the world leaders in this field.

As previous IPCC reports have pointed out, the effects of warming at the poles are already being felt by indigenous polar species and communities. This new report is confirmation of the culpability of humans in contributing to these rising temperatures.

"I'm afraid that there will always be people that don't believe that we are making all these changes," Dr Karpechko said.

"Some people are waiting for the science to say that a particular heat wave is caused by humans. But attributing specific effects to human activities is much more difficult than attributing global changes. I don't know if we should wait for that because it will be too late.

"I see from the data that there is warming. This is really frightening."

Link to article: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/10/30/polar.warming/index.html

Blogger's note: I have a tendency to read such articles with a highly jaundiced eye.

China's strategies to combat climate change

By Changhua Wu | 7 October 2008

Editor's note: The following article is drawn from findings published in the Climate Group's July report, "China's Clean Revolution." PDF

China is pursuing a green energy program for all the right reasons: It will offer the country a new source of domestically produced energy, provide an alternative to imported fuels, and help support Beijing's ongoing economic development. What's more, a renewable energy platform also lays the groundwork for developing new business sectors that could contribute to the economy through job creation and export potential. In short, China recognizes that energy efficiency addresses global warming, but also that the actions needed to tackle climate change also could contribute to economic development. In addition, by moving quickly to implement policies that address global warming, China is positioning itself to work more effectively with the international community to negotiate a successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol.

That isn't to say any of this will be easy. China faces real challenges in balancing continued economic development against the need to safeguard the environment domestically and to play a responsible role in the international community as well.

Since Beijing launched its economic reforms in the early 1980s and opened the country to ever-increasing levels of foreign investment, China's economy has grown at a breakneck pace of 10-15 percent each year--with the exception of 1989 and 1990 when gross domestic product (GDP) growth cooled. Even as the global economy has vacillated since 2001, the Chinese economy has continued to grow at rates of 8-11 percent per year. An explosion in manufacturing has largely driven this rapid expansion. In the process, China has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and turned itself into an economic and industrial powerhouse.

Of course, the rapid growth and major shift to manufacturing has meant a corresponding rise in energy use. As a result, China has become the planet's largest emitter of greenhouse gases. China is also now the world's largest producer and consumer of coal at about 2.5 billion tons--or 40 percent of the global total. In fact, coal is the source of 80 percent of Chinese electricity, and is one of the few fuel resources China has in great abundance.

Yet, overall, energy intensity in China has improved steadily at a rate of around 3.9 percent per year from 1980 to 2005, resulting in impressive cumulative gains. For example, in 1980, China consumed 17 tons of coal for every $1,400 of GDP it produced, but that figure fell to 1.2 tons per $1,400 of GDP in 2006.

And despite the rapid rise in total energy use, per-capita energy consumption is still well below that of the West, as the average Chinese citizen consumes less than one-half the energy of the average person in the European Union (EU) and only one-fourth that of the average American. Again, the challenge becomes how China will deliver an improved standard of living for its populace while also protecting the environment and addressing global warming. It's an especially vexing proposition when Beijing's reliance on coal is considered.

More here: http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/chinas-strategies-to-combat-climate-change

Living Planet analysis shows looming ecological credit crunch

29 Oct 2008
Gland, Switzerland: The world is heading for an ecological credit crunch as human demands on the world's natural capital reach nearly a third more than earth can sustain.

That is the stark warning contained in the latest edition of WWF’s Living Planet Report, the leading statement of the planet’s health. In addition global natural wealth and diversity continues to decline, and more and more countries are slipping into a state of permanent or seasonal water stress.

“The world is currently struggling with the consequences of over-valuing its financial assets,” said WWF International Director-General James Leape, “but a more fundamental crisis looms ahead – an ecological credit crunch caused by under-valuing the environmental assets that are the basis of all life and prosperity.”

The report, produced with the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) and the Global Footprint Network (GFN), shows more than three quarters of the world’s people now living in nations that are ecological debtors, where national consumption has outstripped their country’s biological capacity.

“Most of us are propping up our current lifestyles, and our economic growth, by drawing – and increasingly overdrawing – on the ecological capital of other parts of the world,” Mr Leape said.

“If our demands on the planet continue to increase at the same rate, by the mid-2030s we would need the equivalent of two planets to maintain our lifestyles.”

The report, published every two years, has since 1998 become widely accepted as an statement of earth's ability to remain a “living planet.” In 2008, it adds for the first time new measures of global, national and individual water footprint to existing measures of the Ecological Footprint of human demand on natural resources and the Living Planet Index, a measure of the state of nature.

The Living Planet Index, compiled by ZSL, shows a nearly 30% decline since 1970 in nearly 5000 measured populations of 1,686 species. These dramatic losses in our natural wealth are being driven by deforestation and land conversion in the tropics (50% decline in Tropical LPI) and the impact of dams, diversions and climate change on freshwater species (35% decline). Pollution, over-fishing and destructive fishing in marine and coastal environments is also taking a considerable toll.

“We are acting ecologically in the same way as financial institutions have been behaving economically – seeking immediate gratification without due regard for the consequences,” said ZSL co-editor Jonathan Loh. “The consequences of a global ecological crisis are even graver than the current economic meltdown.”

Carbon emissions from fossil fuel use and land disturbance are the greatest component of humanity’s footprint, underlining the key threat of climate change. The ecological footprint analysis, produced by GFN, shows that while global biocapacity – the area available to produce our resources and capture our emissions – is 2.1 average or “global” hectares per person, the per person footprint is 2.7 global ha.

“Continued ecological deficit spending will have severe economic consequences,” said GFN Executive Director Dr Mathis Wackernagel. “Resource limitations and ecosystem collapses would trigger massive stagflation with the value of investments plummeting, while food and energy costs skyrocket.”

The USA and China have the largest national footprints, each in total about 21% of global biocapacity, but US citizens each require an average of 9.4 global ha (or nearly 4.5 Planet Earths if the global population had US consumption patterns) while Chinese citizens use on average 2.1 global ha per person (one Planet Earth).

Biocapacity is unevenly distributed, with eight nations – the United States, Brazil, Russia, China, India, Canada, Argentina and Australia – containing more than half the world total. Population and consumption patterns make three of these countries ecological debtors, with footprints greater than their national biocapacity – the United States (footprint 1.8 times national biocapacity), China (2.3 times) and India ( 2.2 times).

This can be contrasted with the Congo with the seventh highest per person biocapacity of 13.9 global ha per person and an average footprint of just 0.5 global ha per person – but facing a future of degrading biocapacity from deforestation and increased demands from a rising population and export pressures.

The new water footprint measures show up the significance of water traded in the form of commodities with, for example, a cotton T-shirt requiring 2,900 litres of water in its production. On average, each person consumes 1.24 million litres (about half an Olympic swimming pool) of water a year, but this varies from 2.48 million litres per person a year (USA) to 619,000 litres per capita annually (Yemen).

“Around 50 countries are currently facing moderate or severe water stress and the number of people suffering from year-round or seasonal water shortages is expected to increase as a result of climate change,” the report finds.

“These Living Planet measures serve as clear and robust signposts to what needs to be done,” said Mr Leape. “It is our hope that in years to come we will be reporting increases in the Living Planet Index, an ecological footprint coming down in shoe sizes and water becoming more rather than less available in more places.”

The report suggests some key “sustainability wedges” which if combined could stabilise and reverse the worsening slide into ecological debt and enduring damage to global support systems. For the single most important challenge – climate change – the report shows that a range of efficiency, renewable and low emissions “wedges” could meet projected energy demands to 2050 with reductions in carbon emissions of 60–80%.

“If humanity has the will, it has the ways to live within the means of the planet, but we must recognize that the ecological credit crunch will require even bolder action than that now being mustered for the financial crisis” Mr Leape said.

Link to article: http://www.panda.org/index.cfm?uNewsID=148922

The data prove that overall volume of sea ice is decreasing, say researchers

The thickness of Arctic sea ice "plummeted" last winter, thinning by as much as 49 centimetres (1.6 ft.) in some regions, satellite data has revealed.

A study by UK researchers showed that the ice thickness had been fairly constant for the previous five winters.

The team from University College London added that the results provided the first definitive proof that the overall volume of Arctic ice was decreasing.

The findings have been published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters.

"The ice thickness was fairly constant for the five winters before this, but it plummeted in the winter after the 2007 minimum," lead author Katharine Giles told BBC News.

I think this is the first time that we can definitively say that the bulk overall volume of ice has decreased Dr Seymour Laxon University College London

Sea ice in the Arctic shrank to its smallest size on record in September 2007, when it extended across an area of just 4.13 million sq. km (1.59 million sq. miles), beating the previous record low of 5.32 million sq. km, measured in 2005.

The team from the university's Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling -- part of the UK's National Centre for Earth Observation -- found that last winter the ice had thinned by an average of 26 cm (0.9 ft.) below the 2002-2008 winter average.

Dr Giles added that the data also showed the western Arctic experienced the greatest impact, where the ice thinned by up to 49 cm (1.6 ft.).

Melting point

The recent record losses of ice cover in the Arctic has led to suggestions that the region could have reached a "tipping point" but some uncertainty over the causes had remained, explained co-author Seymour Laxon.

"The extent can change because the ice can be redistributed, increasing the amount of open water," he told BBC News. "But this does not reduce the overall amount of ice."

'Green eye' tech centre launched

"To determine whether the reduction in sea ice extent is the result of ice being piled up against the coast or whether it is the result of melting, you need to measure the thickness."

"I think this is the first time that we can definitively say that the bulk overall volume of ice has decreased," observed Dr Laxon.

"So this means melting; it doesn't mean that the ice has just been pushed up against the coastline."

Dr Giles explained that the measurements gathered by satellite provided a continuous data-set and had a number of advantages over other methods.

"Drilling, submarines or aircraft; all of these techniques can be limited by time and space," she said.

"You can only sample relatively small areas, and you cannot have a continuous time series -- it's a very harsh environment, so field experiments in winter are logistically difficult."

"We have been using satellite data, which means we get coverage all across the Arctic Ocean (apart from the very centre) and we get it continuously, so we have great coverage both in terms of time and area."

The measurements were recorded via a radar altimeter onboard the European Space Agency's (ESA) ENVISAT satellite.

The altimeter fires pulses of electromagnetic waves down on to the ice, which reflects them back up to a receiver on the satellite.

The time taken for the waves to complete this journey is recorded, and it is a fairly straightforward calculation to work out the height of the ice above sea level.

As one-tenth of the ice sits above the water, it is then possible to work out the overall volume and thickness of ice in that location.

Dr Laxon said the project's findings are being used to help climate modellers refine their projections of what is going to happen in the future.

"The time when Arctic sea ice is going to disappear is open to a lot of debate," he said.

"About five years ago, the average projection for the sea ice disappearing was about 2080.

"But the ice minimums, and this evidence of melting, suggests that we should favour the models that suggest the sea ice will disappear by 2030-2040, but there is still a lot of uncertainty."

The researchers hope to keep the data series, funded by the EU and the Natural Environmental Research Council (NERC), running for as long as satellite-based measurements are available.

Link to article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7692963.stm

The Public's Dangerous Misunderstanding of Climate Change

As I report on climate change, I come across a lot of scary facts, like the possibility that thawing permafrost in Siberia could release gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, or the risk that Greenland could pass a tipping point and begin to melt rapidly. But one of the most frightening studies I've read recently had nothing to do with icebergs or megadroughts. In a paper that came out Oct. 23 in Science, John Sterman -- a professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology's (MIT) Sloan School of Management -- wrote about asking 212 MIT grad students to give a rough idea how much governments need to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to eventually stop the increase in the concentration of carbon in the atmosphere. These students had training in science, technology, mathematics and economics at one of the best schools in the world -- they are probably a lot smarter than you or me. Yet 84% of Sterman's subjects got his problem wrong, greatly underestimating the degree to which greenhouse gas emissions need to fall. When the MIT kids can't figure out climate change, what are the odds that the broader public will?

The shocking study reflects the tremendous gap that exists on global warming. On the one hand are the scientists, who with few exceptions think that climate change is very serious and needs to be dealt with immediately and ambitiously. On the other side is the public, which increasingly believes that climate change is real and worries about it, but which rarely ranks it as a high priority. A 2007 survey by the UN Development Programme found that 54% of Americans advocate taking a "wait-and-see" approach to climate change action -- holding off on the deep and rapid cuts in global warming that would immediately impact their lives. (And it's not just SUV-driving Americans -- similar majorities were found in Russia, China and India.) As a result, we have our current dilemma -- a steady drumbeat of scientific evidence of global warming's severity, and comparatively little in the way of meaningful political action. "This gap exists," says Sterman. "The real question is why."

That's where Sterman's research comes in. "There is a profound and fundamental misconception about climate," he says. The problem is that most of us don't really understand how carbon accumulates in the atmosphere. Increasing global temperatures are driven by the increase in the concentration of carbon in the atmosphere. Before the industrial age, the concentration was about 280 parts per million (ppm) of carbon in the atmosphere. After a few centuries of burning coal, oil and other fossil fuels, we've raised that concentration to 387 ppm, and it's rising by about 2 ppm every year. Many scientists believe that we need to at least stabilize carbon concentrations at 450 ppm, to ensure that global temperatures don't increase more than about 2 C above the pre-industrial level. To do that, we need to reduce global carbon emissions (which hit about 10 billion tons last year) until they are equal to or less than the amount of carbon sequestered by the oceans and plant life (which removed about 4.8 billion tons of carbon last year). It's just like water in a bathtub -- unless more water is draining out than flowing in from the tap, eventually the bathtub will overflow.

That means that carbon emissions would need to be cut drastically from current levels. Yet almost all of the subjects in Sterman's study failed to realize that, assuming instead that you could stabilize carbon concentration simply by capping carbon emissions at their current level. That's not the case -- and in fact, pursuing such a plan for the future would virtually guarantee that global warming could spin out of control. It may seem to many like good common sense to wait until we see proof of the serious damage global warming is doing before we take action. But it's not -- we can't "wait and see" on global warming because the climate has a momentum all its own, and if we wait for decades to finally act to reduce carbon emissions, it could well be too late. Yet this simply isn't understood. Someone as smart as Bill Gates doesn't seem to get it. "Fortunately climate change, although it's a huge challenge, it's a challenge that happens over a long period of time," he said at a forum in Beijing last year. "You know, we have time to work on it." But the truth is we don't.

If elite scientists could simply solve climate change on their own, public misunderstanding wouldn't be such a problem. But it can't. Reducing carbon emissions sharply will require all 6.5 billion (and growing) of us to hugely change the way we use energy and travel. We'll also need to change the way we vote, to reward politicians willing to make the tough choices on climate. Instead of a new Manhattan Project -- the metaphor often used on global warming -- Sterman believes that what is needed is closer to a new civil rights movement, a large-scale campaign that dramatically changes the public's beliefs and behaviors. New groups like Al Gore's We Campaign are aiming for just such a social transformation, but "the reality is that this is even more difficult than civil rights," says Sterman. "Even that took a long time, and we don't have that kind of time with the climate."

The good news is that you don't need a PhD in climatology to understand what needs to be done. If you can grasp the bathtub analogy, you can understand how to stop global warming. The burden is on scientists to better explain in clear English the dynamics of the climate system, and how to affect it. (Sterman says that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's landmark report last year was "completely inadequate" on this score.) As for the rest of us, we should try to remember that sometimes common sense isn't a match for science.

Link to article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20081027/hl_time/thepublicsdangerousmisunderstandingofclimatechange

Arctic is melting even in winter

The polar icecap is retreating and thinning at a record rate

Jonathan Leake

The Arctic icecap is now shrinking at record rates in the winter as well as summer, adding to evidence of disastrous melting near the North Pole, according to research by British scientists.

They have found that the widely reported summer shrinkage, which this year resulted in the opening of the Northwest Passage, is continuing in the winter months with the thickness of sea ice decreasing by a record 19% last winter.

Usually the Arctic icecap recedes in summer and then grows back in winter. These findings suggest the period in which the ice renews itself has become much shorter.

Dr Katharine Giles, who led the study and is based at the Centre for Polar Observation and Modelling at University College London (UCL), said the thickness of Arctic sea ice had shown a slow downward trend during the previous five winters but then accelerated.

She said: “After the summer 2007 record melting, the thickness of the winter ice also nose-dived. What is concerning is that sea ice is not just receding but it is also thinning.”

The cause of the thinning is, however, potentially even more alarming. Giles found that the winter air temperatures in 2007 were cold enough that they could not have been the cause.

This suggests some other, longer-term change, such as a rise in water temperature or a change in ocean circulation that has brought warmer water under the ice.

If confirmed, this could mean that the Arctic is likely to melt much faster than had been thought. Some researchers say that the summer icecap could vanish within a decade.

The research, reported in Geophysical Research Letters, showed that last winter the average thickness of sea ice over the whole Arctic was 26 cm (10%) less than the average thickness of the previous five winters.

However, sea ice in the western Arctic lost about 49 cm of thickness. This region saw the Northwest Passage become ice-free and open to shipping for the first time in 30 years during the summer of 2007.

The UCL researchers used satellites to measure sea-ice thickness from 2002 to 2008. Winter sea ice in the Arctic is about 8 ft. thick on average.

The team is the first to measure ice thickness throughout the winter, from October to March, over more than half of the Arctic, using the European Space Agency’s Envisat satellite.

Giles’s findings confirm the more detailed work of Peter Wadhams, professor of ocean physics at Cambridge University, who has undertaken six voyages under the icecap in Royal Navy nuclear submarines since 1976 and has gathered data from six more voyages.

The vessels use an upward-looking echo-sounder to measure the thickness of sea ice above the vessel. The data gathered can then be compared with previous years to find changes in thickness.

Wadhams published his first paper in 1990, showing that the Arctic ice had grown 15% thinner between 1976 and 1987.

In March 2007 he went under the Arctic again in HMS Tireless and found that the winter ice had been thinning even more quickly; it was now 50% of the 1976 thickness.

“This enormous ice retreat in the last two summers is the culmination of a thinning process that has been going on for decades, and now the ice is just collapsing,” Wadhams said.

The scale of the ice loss has also been shown by other satellite-based observations that are used to measure the area of the Arctic icecap as it grows and shrinks with the seasons.

In winter it normally reaches about 5.8 million square miles before receding to about 2.7 million square miles in summer.

In 2007, however, the sun shone for many more days than normal, raising water temperatures to 4.3 C above the average. By September the Arctic icecap had lost an extra 1.1 million square miles, equivalent to more than 12 times the area of Britain.

That reduced the area of summer ice to 1.6 million square miles, 43% smaller than it was in 1979, when satellite observations began.

At the heart of the melting in the Arctic is a simple piece of science. Ice is white, so most of the sunlight hitting it is reflected back into space. When it melts, however, it leaves open ocean, which, being darker, absorbs light and so gets warmer. This helps to melt more ice. It also makes it harder for ice to form again in winter. The process accelerates until there is no more ice to melt.

Wadhams said: “This is one of the most serious problems the world has ever faced.”

Link to article: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article5014744.ece

[Blogger's note: it is my not-so-humble opinion that we need to get back down to 350 ppm -- this report is trying to say that 450 ppm is not possible.]

Australia's Stern review warns of runaway global warming

Carbon emissions are rising so fast that the world has no chance of hitting climate targets, says Australian economist

CO2 curbs may be too late for reefs, study warns

Link to pdf file with links to candidates (begins on page 3): http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/20081023_Obstruction.pdf

Congressman Tim Walberg Named Latest Member of the 2008 Dirty Dozen

WASHINGTON, DC, October 14, 2008 - The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today announced that U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg of Michigan's 7th District has been named to its 2008 "Dirty Dozen" list.

LCV's trademark Dirty Dozen program targets candidates for Congress — regardless of party affiliation — who consistently vote against clean energy and conservation and are running in races in which LCV has a serious chance to affect the outcome. Since the Dirty Dozen was launched in 1996, LCV has defeated more than half of the candidates named to the list. In 2006 alone, LCV ousted several supposedly "undefeatable" incumbents such as former House Resources Chairman Richard Pombo and former Senator Conrad Burns....more

Anne Northup Named to 2008 Dirty Dozen

WASHINGTON, DC, October 14, 2008 - The League of Conservation Voters, which works to turn environmental issues into national priorities, today added Anne Northup to its 2008 Dirty Dozen list.* Northup has a lifetime score of only 7% on LCV's National Environmental Scorecard and voted against every major piece of environmental legislation in the 109th Congress.

"With energy at the heart of the 2008 election, it is critical that we elect Representatives who will steer us away from Big Oil and toward a clean, renewable energy policy," said LCV Deputy Legislative Director Tim Greeff. "Anne Northup has a deplorable environmental record and promises to continue our reliance on oil and minimize investment in alternative energy sources." ...more

Don Young Joins the 2008 Dirty Dozen

WASHINGTON, DC, October 2, 2008 - WASHINGTON, DC –The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today added Alaska Congressman Don Young to its 2008 “Dirty Dozen” list.* Young’s abysmal record on energy issues makes him one of this year’s worst candidates for re-election to the US House of Representatives.

“Alaska is the frontline of global warming. As their homes and businesses slide into the sea, the people of Alaska deserve a Representative who will fight for real solutions, not oil company profits,” said LCV President Gene Karpinski. “Don Young has repeatedly blocked legislation that would raise fuel efficiency in our cars; repeal subsides for oil conglomerates, and invest in clean renewable energy, working instead to pad the pockets of Big Oil interests at home and in Washington.”...more

LCV Urges Voters to Turn Out the Lights on Senator Dole

WASHINGTON, DC, September 15, 2008 - The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today announced that Senator Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) has been named to its 2008 “Dirty Dozen” list. Dole has a lifetime score of only 4% on LCV’s National Environmental Scorecard.*

“Senator Dole’s record proves that she’s working in the best interests of Exxon/Mobil, not the people of Raliegh/Durham. For Chevron, not the people of Charlotte. For the lobbyists of big oil, not the people of small town North Carolina,” LCV Senior Vice President Tony Massaro said.

“Instead of protecting clean water and clean air for our health or developing clean energy for our children, she votes in favor of oil company profits every time.”...more

Dean Andal Takes Pombo’s Place in the 2008 Dirty Dozen

WASHINGTON, DC, August 14, 2008 - The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today added Dean Andal to its 2008 “Dirty Dozen” list.* Andal’s abysmal record on energy and environmental issues make him one of the worst candidates for federal office in the nation. “Californians are paying over $4.50 per gallon for gasoline, and deserve a representative who will work to end our nation’s dependence on oil, and fight for alternative energy sources,” LCV Senior Vice President Tony Massaro said.

“Andal has consistently voted against fuel efficiency programs and measures to slow global warming. His current proposals echo the failed policies of the Bush Administration that created the situation we’re in now. If elected, Andal will help the oil industry dismantle the laws that protect California’s coastline from oil spills from tankers and offshore drilling while doing nothing to reduce the price of gasoline.”...more

Congressman Sam Graves Earns Dubious Distinction as Member of 2008 Dirty Dozen

WASHINGTON, DC, August 12, 2008 - The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today added Congressman Sam Graves (MO-6) to its 2008 “Dirty Dozen” list.* Graves has earned an abysmal lifetime LCV score of only 4% on energy and environmental issues. He has accepted $63,983 from the oil & gas industry.
“While the people of Missouri are paying record prices at the pump, the oil companies are handing that money right back to Sam Graves,” LCV Senior Vice President Tony Massaro said.

“Is it any wonder that he keeps voting to give those same oil companies billions of our tax dollars? Thanks to Sam Graves, we’re paying Exxon twice for the same gas – once at the pump and again with the tax dollars that could be going to schools, to veterans, or to developing new sources of energy that would create thousands of jobs in Missouri.” ...more

LCV Adds Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) to 2008 "Dirty Dozen"

WASHINGTON, DC, July 1, 2008 - The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today announced that Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) has been named to its 2008 “Dirty Dozen” list. Stevens holds a lifetime score of only 14% on the LCV environmental scorecard.

“For forty years in the Senate, Ted Stevens has stood in the way of progress. Today, he literally lives in the house that oil built,” LCV President Gene Karpinski said. “With his scandalous ties to the oil industry finally exposed, Alaska has the chance to let Mr. Stevens retire to that nice house.”

Stevens has consistently voted for billions of dollars in tax breaks for oil companies since 1977. Oil and gas interests have given more than $460,000 in campaign contributions to Stevens’s campaigns. Last July, the FBI raided Stevens’s home in search of records documenting his connection to Bill Allen, an executive of the Veco oil services company, which reaped millions in federal contracts and who was convicted of bribery. Allen’s contracting business doubled the size of Stevens’s home. Stevens is under federal investigation. ...more

LCV Adds Senator Mary Landrieu to 2008 "Dirty Dozen"

WASHINGTON, DC, July 1, 2008 - The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today added Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) to its 2008 “Dirty Dozen” list.* Her lifetime LCV Score of 43% ranks her the worst Democrat in the Senate on environmental issues currently running for reelection. **

Last week, Dr. Thomas Fingar, the Chairman of the National Intelligence Council testified that global warming poses a significant risk to America’s national security, and that “some parts of the United States—particularly built-up coastal areas—will be at greater risk of extreme weather events.” In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Louisiana’s representatives should be leading the charge in the fight against global warming.

“For a Senator from Louisiana, which faces severe consequences from global warming, to fail to protect Louisiana is disappointing,” LCV Senior Vice President for Political Affairs and Public Education Tony Massaro said. “Senator Landrieu joins the DD because she acts more to protect Big Oil than the future for the people of Louisiana.” ..more

LCV Adds Congressman Steve Pearce to 2008 "Dirty Dozen"

WASHINGTON, DC, July 1, 2008 - The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), which works to turn environmental values into national priorities, today added Congressman Stevan Pearce (R-NM) to its 2008 "Dirty Dozen" list.* Pearce’s record of extremism marks him as one of the twelve worst members of Congress currently up for election.

"During his five years in Congress, Steve Pearce has voted consistently against the environment," LCV Senior Vice-President for Political Affairs and Public Education Tony Massaro said. "Of the 80 conservation key votes since he has been elected, Pearce has voted against clean air, clean energy, protecting the nation's wildlife, and preserving our natural heritage in all but one vote."

Pearce's lifetime LCV score is an embarrassing 1%. He has earned three 0% scores in his tenure and his highest annual score was 5% in his first year.** His opponent, Tom Udall, has earned a 96% lifetime LCV score.

In addition to owning millions of dollars of stock in Key Energy, a Texas-based oil services company, Steve Pearce has accepted more from the oil and gas industry, $556,649, than from any other economic sector. He has voted to give more than $14 billion in tax breaks to the oil industry, opposed renewable electricity, and fought against fuel efficient cars that would save New Mexico families hundreds of dollars at the pump...more

LCV Adds Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to 2008 "Dirty Dozen"

WASHINGTON, DC, April 10, 2008 - The members of the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), the independent political voice for the environment, today voted Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) to the 2008 "Dirty Dozen" list.

LCV members voted online to decide which 2008 candidate had committed the most egregious offenses against the environment. 25,000 concerned citizens voted for the next member of the "Dirty Dozen," and chose Sen. McConnell by an overwhelming margin.

"Our members know that Mitch McConnell has voted against our health and safety since he came to Washington. They know that he stands as an impassable roadblock in the way of a clean energy future for this country," said LCV President Gene Karpinski. "They know that it is time to tear down this roadblock. That's why McConnell, this 'Godfather of Green,' is the new 'Don' of the Dirty Dozen."..more

LCV Adds Former U.S. Rep. Bob Schaffer to 2008 "Dirty Dozen"

WASHINGTON, DC, Jan. 24, 2008 - The League of Conservation Voters (LCV), the independent political voice for the environment, today announced that former U.S. Rep. Bob Schaffer (R-CO) has been named to its 2008 "Dirty Dozen" list.

During his tenure in Congress, Bob Schaffer worked to get Big Oil $33 billion in tax breaks by supporting an energy bill written by Dick Cheney and the oil industry. After leaving the House, he went to work for Big Oil. Now he wants to return to Washington to work for them in the Senate," said LCV Senior Vice President and Colorado native Tony Massaro. "Coloradans deserve a senator who works for them, not Big Oil."..more

MOST IMPORTANT SENATE RACES:

COLORADO US SENATE: Mark Udall has been a leader on renewable energy since his time in the Colorado State House, and as Co-Chair of the House Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus, he fights to expand America's commitment to renewable energy every day. His lifetime LCV score is 99%. RUNNING AGAINST REPUBLICAN STEVE PEARCE

NEW MEXICO US SENATE: Tom Udall has fought to defend America's wild spaces and led the first successful effort to pass meaningful renewable electricity standards in the House in 2007. His lifetime LCV score is 96%. RUNNING AGAINST SCHAEFFER

NEW HAMPSHIRE US SENATE: Former Governor Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire worked with members of both parties to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants and has pledged to fight for clean energy as a US Senator. RUNNING AGAINST INCUMBENT JOHN E. SUNUNU