When I’m only home for two days between trips, I have to take advantage of my favorite local eats, one of which is Rehanah’s Roti. If you live anywhere in the Greater Vancouver area, it’s totally worth a visit. Thanks to Robin and Stacey for telling Caryn and I about this joint, yum!

I got a copy of What is Enlightenment magazine in the mail this morning, which is soon to be called EnlighteNext. It’s a quarterly publication, and I’m always excited when it arrives, especially before my flight to Quebec on Wednesday.

Here’s a cool link mentioned in the magazines ’sites and blogs’ section; it’s from Nikon and it’s called Universcale. Surf around it, you can learn about the tiniest and the largest things we know about the universe, all presented in a pretty slick flash style site.

Another fantastic idea for those who like to read non-fiction style spiritual and self help books is PhilosophersNotes.com. I haven’t tried this out because I like to soak in entire books, but those in a rush, or those who want these cliff style notes in an mp3 format the commute, I think it’s a great plan to subscribe to.

As a fan of WIE (What is Enlightenment Magazine) and of WorldChanging, the following article that I first read in the hard copy of WIE that comes to my door, and re-read this morning on the ‘puter, follows many of the conclusions that much of my varied reading topics has lead me to come to. ‘A Brighter Shade of Green’ by Ross Robertson is worthy of a full read, and hope it is just a spark for you to do further personal research on what it all means. 

I like their term ‘bright green’, it sits quite well with me; it represents the new school environmentalists, as hinted at by Bruce Sterling in this quote from the article:

“It’s a question of tactics. Civil society does not respond at all well to moralistic scolding. There are small minority groups here and there who are perfectly aware that it is immoral to harm the lives of coming generations by massive consumption now: deep Greens, Amish, people practicing voluntary simplicity, Gandhian ashrams and so forth. These public-spirited voluntarists are not the problem. But they’re not the solution either, because most human beings won’t volunteer to live like they do. . . . However, contemporary civil society can be led anywhere that looks attractive, glamorous and seductive. The task at hand is therefore basically an act of social engineering. Society must become Green, and it must be a variety of Green that society will eagerly consume. What is required is not a natural Green, or a spiritual Green, or a primitivist Green, or a blood-and-soil romantic Green. These flavors of Green have been tried and have proven to have insufficient appeal. . . . The world needs a new, unnatural, seductive, mediated, glamorous Green. A Viridian Green, if you will.”

So gone are the days of the dark green neighborhood recycling nazi, lets welcome a brighter future, one not based on fear and guilt, but one built by first looking deep within, and then bravely creating an optimistic worldview, and pursuing a sacred activism that utilizes the brilliance of a science steeped in integrity, 

Caryn and I quickly overcame jetlag, and have settled in to our home for the next five nights in Kirchberg, Austria. By the way, the trick for dealing with jetlag is as follows: Lets say you arrive at 10am in the morning, in Munich, after traveling for about 16 hours, and dealing with an 8 hour time change. The trick is to keep your eyes open during the remaining first day and refrain from taking a nap (which surely would last a number of hours). Once it’s evening time, say 9pm, then go to sleep, and you’ll sleep beautifully for at least 8 or 9 hours and be good to go the next day….on with the story….

So we spent our first two nights in downtown Munich, exploring the city, drinking tea, eating ice-cream (the temperature was about 26 Celsius), and randomly meandered the walking only streets in the city center (much like Whistler Village only way bigger).

The first thing that struck me about Munich (much like many European cities) was the huge number of cyclists. It’s an official stat that 25% of the residents of Munich commute to work by bicycle, incredible!! My question is whether the positive effects of riding so much counter-balance the negative effects of all the heavy drinking and smoking going on?! I was psyched that there is no smoking allowed inside restaurants anymore, and that goes for all public indoor spaces, including Backstage Werk, the venue for the Xavier Rudd concert we went to last night; it was AWESOME! Perhaps this uber talented Australian is not as famous in Germany as back home in BC (where his wife is from) judging by the size of venue, but the fans attending sure were genuine and psyched. The real beauty this intimate venue was to see up close details and facial expressions during the performance. I love Xavier, what can I say.

I’ll be setting up for my first show tomorrow in Kitzbuhel for the KitzAlp Bike Festival, and look forward to riding with Thomas Ohler again. We explored this adorable mountain village today, and are excited to spend the next four days in the area.  Hopefully the weather holds strong, it was over 30 degrees Celsius today, and the heat was beat by swimming in a lake surrounded by views of the Alps, NICE!!

The dinnertime show was a thunderstorm where the rumble didn’t stop for over ten minutes, not even a breather, much like Xaviers didgeridoo skills; perhaps the amphitheater of mountains surrounding us was the reason.

Here’s an amusing photo that Caryn took today in Kitzbhuel, no disrespect, just a bit of a language thing I guess! (look to the writing on the wheelbarrow)

Hope you’re all well, peace…

Ryan Leech

As seen in Mountain Biking Magazine…

By the time this article goes to print, the Banff Mountain Film Festival World Tour will have shown the special edit of my segment from Kranked 6, “Trial and Error”, to over 100,000 people. In this film I share my instinctual feelings of concern when seeing or thinking about clear cutting a forest.

I often show this video at my school presentations, and while on tour up in Northern BC where forestry supports a large chunk of the population, I began feeling a little sheepish about showing it, as I certainly am no expert on the topic. In the film I reference the particular zone of forest where my trail is built, “this is one of the last remaining sections of mid elevation old growth on the BC coast, and it’s slated for clear cut.” Then one of the analogies I make in the film is that “it seems to me that clear cutting is exactly like a crash, and they’ve done it time and time again, and perhaps haven’t learned from their mistakes.” I didn’t want to insult those in BC that base their livelihood on the industry and give them a bad reputation from my generalizing statements. Perhaps they have learned, and perhaps there are some ecologically sound logging practices in effect.

I needed to find out some more information, so while up in Northern BC I had the opportunity to chat with Dawn Stronstad R.P.F. who is a Planning Forester in Burns Lake, also an avid mountain biker with the BLMBA. She shared her own personal feelings on the topic of clear cutting. She gave me a brief history of logging in Canada, and acknowledges that there have been many mistakes along the way. But long gone are the days of the cut & run without looking back (this is happening in South America right now), and she believes that BC has learned from their mistakes. British Columbia has some of the most stringent logging laws in the world, and if a logging company hadn’t morally been doing the right thing in the past, they are now contractually and lawfully obligated to.

It is hard to complain about clear cutting when we as the consumer hold so much power. When we’re out at the store and buy something with a big cardboard box, we are really saying “please, please cut down that tree so I can have this nice packaging again”, then we grab a newspaper with a ‘coffee to go’ on the way home and what we are really saying to the logging companies is “oh and while you’re at it, cut down that tree beside the first one”.

Dawn told me that there are some areas that should not have been clear cut in the past, and portions of these areas are slow to recover or have reduced potential for re-growth, she thinks for the most part, these sites have recovered, but some areas not as quickly; but if done properly, clear cutting can be a reasonable forest management system. In fact, many foresters are amazed at the recovery capacity of Nature to bounce back; old growth is of course another story. The ironic thing about our disgust with clear cuts in BC is that it is along the coast where the most incredible old growth occurs, so the act of clear cutting is the most damaging and yet most of  us live on the largest and most permanent clear cut in BC, Vancouver.

I was fortunate enough to hear a speech by the young Simon Jackson, who has lobbied for the protection of the endangered Spirit Bear in BC. Great steps have been taken to secure 2/3 of this creatures habitat as protected, but another 1/3 is still open for potential logging; the government is aware and lobbyists are hopeful for full protection. I also heard Bill Clinton speak recently, and his Clinton Climate Initiative is anxious about the rapid deforestation of rainforests, especially in South America, this is where some unprecedented devastation is happening, far greater than anything we have ever seen in BC (the Amazon loses about 60,000 square kilometers a year), and being global citizens, these acts effect us just as much as if it was our own backyard, so perhaps this is where our lobbying efforts and expertise need to be focused now? It’s a complicated topic with so many different views, opinions, and motivations.

All I know is that the trees we do have deserve some respect, so next time you’re out shredding the trails, make sure you do some tree hugging!

Ryan

“WIRED” magazines’ latest headline is as follows, “Attention Environmentalists: Keep your SUV. Forget organics. Go nuclear. Screw the spotted owl.”

Whew! Just wanted to share a few thoughts that might unwire a few of these front cover claims (although the big corp might have won my dollar by buying the magazine, I won’t necessarily buy all the jargon claimed by it).

There are ten instructions to action suggested by the magazine, I will comments on each. There are many great points, ones I am in total agreement with, but in general these are shortsighted, ‘cut carbon at all costs’ solutions that will perhaps benefit the current generations, but may leave the future ones in a jam.

1. Live in Cities

The current suburban model in North America, and many other countries who are following in our footsteps, just does not promote a sustainable way of living. Check out this map representing the amount of CO2 emitted per househould in the greater San Francisco area. I think it paints a pretty clear picture.

I’ll let Alex Steffen use his words to firm up the point, “Billions more people living in suburbs and driving SUV’s to shopping malls is a recipe for planetary suicide. We can’t even afford to continue that way of life ourselves.” Ahh the American Dream. But perhaps if everyone traded their grass lawns for vegatable gardens, and took their grid dependant homes off the grid with sustainable energy technology that is now available, we’d be going in the right direction…the extreme commuting is another story.

2. A/C is OK

This is an interesting analysis, and important to consider. Generally what they are hinting at is that it takes more energy to heat a home than it does to cool one with A/C. Good point, but don’t run with it, be conscious, whether you are heating or cooling; a few degrees either way makes a big difference.

3. Organics are not the answer

After the catchy title above, they go on to wisely say ,“Organic produce can be good for the climate, but not if it’s grown in energy-dependant hothouses and travels long distances to get to your fridge. What matters is eating food that’s locally grown and in season.” The other point under the ‘organic is bad’ heading is that of the cow. First regarding dairy “So it takes 25 organic cows to make as much milk as 23 industrial ones. More cows, more emissions.” It is a valid argument, but many other things must be taken in to consideration. I will still stick to buying local, organic milk sold in glass jars, over drugged up industrially produced milk from far away sold in plastic jugs. The third point is that of beef, again they say organic is worse. Perhaps they are right, but please do the homework for each situation. A local chunk of hamburger is much greener than those industrial patties that are raised on farms where tropical rainforest used to live, then shipped overseas to your belly. Increasingly, I am leaning towards the vegetarian route, not because of the poor little cow, but because of a myriad of environmental reasons; WIRED gave the interesting stat that meat eaters produce 1.5 tons of greenhouse gas per year more than a vegetarian. Hmmm, good healthy food for thought.

4. Farm the Forests

This is the first point that really made me cringe. The basis of the argument is that trees begin to lose the capacity to absorb as much carbon at about 55 years of age. If that fact is taken without any other considerations, then the math seems intriguing. But as Alex Steffen, from World Changing commented, “But even if WIRED’s math were correct, this would still be a crap fix for climate change. Chopping down forests causes massive soil erosion and leads to desertification, making repeated tree plantings a dodgy prospect. As monocultures, tree farms are far more vulnerable to pest infestations. And batches of trees planted at the same time are more susceptible to wildfires, causing the carbon they’re supposed to be sequestering to go up in smoke.” I think the ‘cut carbon at all costs’ attitude needs a little adjustment before all the trees are killed.

5. China is the solution, Not the problem

My knowledge is somewhat limited on this one. Wired states that 35% of the world’s solar cells are manufactured in China, and that they may be banking big on the green energy revolution. My suggestion, is that whatever product you are purchasing, consider a locally produced one over the ‘Made in China’ stamp.

6. Accept Genetic Engineering

Again, my knowledge is too limited to comment on this one.

7. Carbon Trading Doesn’t Work

Tricky one no doubt. First off reduce (by far the most important of the 3 R’s), then if you still pollute from frequent travel, offset using high quality, gold standard offsets. That is the route I will continue to take until the ‘better route’ WIRED suggested is a reality, which is a tax on fossil fuels.

8. Embrace Nuclear Power

Again Steffen said “That’s short term thinking. If we invested the money that we would spend on new nuclear facilities more wisely (and eliminated subsidies on fossil fuels), alternatives like wind, solar, hydroelectric, and wave power could deliver a clean-energy future more cheaply and probably sooner, without any of the security and or health risks of nuclear plants.” Consider Thom Hartmann’s argument in his book, The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight, “ …power producers have argued that they can label nuclear power as “green,” since, they say, it produces no air pollution. (This overlooks the fact that it takes 18 years of continuous operation before a nuclear plant begins to generate “new” electricity—the first 18 years it’s just producing an amount of energy equal to that used to mine and purify and transport its uranium fuel and to construct and maintain the plant itself.)” He also adds this statement which is the true crux of the situation, “What happens when the oil runs dry—when we no longer have stored up ancient sunlight? Where will the solar cells (or uranium) come from?”…..”This is a problem that environmentalists need to research and examine seriously.”

9. Used Cars, Not Hybrids

“A new Prius would have to travel 100,000 Miles to achieve the carbon savings that come from driving a 1998 Tercel.” The math here in WIRED makes good sense; we unfortunately can’t buy ourselves out of the situation. But be careful, WIRED suggests you should “Keep your SUV”, now that doesn’t mean that you can go run off and buy one!! My worry is that this article will be glanced over by most, and not critically examined enough to make informed decisions.

10. Prepare for the worst

WIRED, “62 years before atmospheric carbon will reach critical levels even if drastic steps are taken now.” Creating fear among the people will never work. I want to finish this post with a quote that is near the beginning of a book I’m reading right now called The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight, by Thom Hartmann, “The reason most solutions offered to the world’s crises are impractical is because they arise from the same worldview that caused the problem. As you’ll see in this book, recycling won’t save the world, birth control won’t save the world, and saving what little is left of the rain-forests won’t save the world. Even if all those good things were fully implemented, our fundamental problem would still remain, and will inevitably be repeated. Even cold fusion and the elimination of the need for oil, with free electricity for everybody, will not “save the world.” Nothing but changing our way of seeing and understanding the world can produce real, meaningful, and lasting change…and that change in perspective will naturally lead us to begin to control our populations, save our forests, re-create community, and reduce our wasteful consumption.” At hint at what is involved in this perspective change is suggested in this last quote from Audrey Kitagawa, “…it means that what we must do as global citizens aware of what is going on in the global landscape, and we must turn that searchlight inwards, to do the ceaseless, fearless, self examination to see not only what must be changed, but how we must change.”  (my italics). 

I’d love to hear your comments…everyone has a different point of view, and they’re all important to consider. 

Much love folks…

I just finished reading a book by Frances Moore Lappe called “Getting a Grip - Clarity, creativity, and courage in a world gone mad”. The book talks about the current state of of the US Government right now, which she calls Thin Democracy; she spends much time talking about how as a people we have the power to create ‘living’ democracy. Learn more from her website.

Quotes….

Our ideas about reality determine what we see, what we believe is possible, and therefore what we become.

And when you think about it, how could we ever believe “the world” can change unless we experience ourselves changing?

The four hundred richest americans are all billionaires, with combined wealth of 1.25 trillion, roughly comparable to the total annual income of half the worlds people.

…as well as the need to feel that our lives matter, which for many people means contributing to something grander than our own survival.

Failing to bring meaning. Finally, Thin Democracy is dangerously vulnably because its materialistic premise can’t satisfy our higher selves’ yearning for transcendent meaning….Thin Democracy’s narrow, insulting assumptions about human nature cannot sustain dedication and sacrifice. Many US soldiers now risk their lives in war, believing they’re serving a high calling. But the built in logic of one rule economics mocks their idealism. Since 9/11, thousands of American soldiers have made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq, while executives of US armament corporations have made a killing, doubling their own compensation.

Living Democracy-democracy as a way of life, no longer something done to us or for us but what we ourselves create.

And the most productive hunters share the most.

Worldwide, for example, more than a third of all grain and 90 percent of soy gets fed to livestock. Future generations may well scratch their heads: You mean, in the early twenty first century their feedlot system put 16 pounds of grain and soy in to cattle to produce only one pound of beef on their plates? You mean that with the amount of water they used for that one pound of beef they could bathe for a year?
Similar plenty appears once we drop the scarcity lens surrounding energy. Our sun wind, waves, water, and biomass offer us a “daily dose of energy” 15,000 times greater than in all the planet harming fossil and nuclear power we now use, says German energy expert Hermann Scheer.

We and the butterflies are in this together.

Beneath our awareness, perhaps, we are coming to realize that our acts do matter, all of them, everywhere, all the time.

One Choice We Don’t Have: In fact, we have no choice about whether to be world changers. If we accept ecology’s insight that we exist in densely woven networks, as just noted, then we must also accept that every choice we make sends out ripples, even if we’re not consciously choosing. So the choice we have is not whether, but only how, we change the world.

Monkey See, monkey do, suddenly took on a whole new meaning for me. Since we humans are wired like our close relatives, when we observe someone else, our own brains are simultaneously experiencing at least something of what that person is experiencing.

In private life, when we go to a friend for advice and that friend simply listens, we’re often amazed to discover it is we oursevles who have the answers. We may have had them all along, but formulating our ideas to make ourselves clear to someone else enables us suddenly to “see” those answers for the first time.

Most of us learn to deny that we’re squelching such needs; maybe it is just to painful to acknowledge how much of ourslves we’re giving up. But if these needs aren’t met, most of us don’t just roll over and pretend we don’t have them; we seek their satisfcation in less than ideal ways…unable to safisfy our yearing for connection through common endeavor, we try the next best thing, to feel included because of our outer identities, wearing what’s “in” choosing work we think will please our parents or bring us status…Our yearning for power gets twisted, too. Power, as I’ve said, means our “capacity to act” but if we feel we can’t make a dent positively, we go for control. If we feel put down at work or at home, not heard or seen, we’re temped to try to exert control over something, maybe our child, our spouse. In its extreme form, the response to thwarting our innate need for power is violence.

Sitting deep in the cushioned armchair, his sweet face framed by a stiff white priests collar, Reverend Njoya paused for only a moment. Then he said, “Fear is an energy that comes from insdie us, not outside. It’s neutral. So we can channel it into fear, paranoia, or euphoria, whatever we choose.” He rose out of his chair. “Imagine a lion,” he said, crouching. “When a lion sees prey or predator, it senses fear first. But instead of lunging blindly in defense or in attack, it recoils.” Reverend Njoya moved back, leaning on his left leg and crouching lower. “The lion pauses a moment, targets his energies. Then he springs.”

I’m just a drop in the bucket. My effort might make me feel better, but it can’t do much…..Every time we act, even with fear, we make room for others to do the same. Courage is contagious.

From this premise of lack, we are finished. We end up locked in a belief system that actually creates the very scarcity we fear.

“Seeing is believing” is a charming aphorism, but maybe it’s also wrong. More accurately, when it comes to humans, “believing is seeing.” We must believe another way of living is possible in order to see it actually taking shape around us.

Mare Mead “Big campaign donors aren’t in it for altruism. They don’t consider their money a contribution; they consider it an investment.”

Which head of lettuce you pick up today or where you buy your next T-shirt may not seem like a world-chaning decision. But it is. The Spiral of Powerlessness is generated not only by laws on the books but by norms that our daily acts create. If we buy pesticide sprayed food, we’re saying to the food industry, yes, yes, give me more of that. If we buy organic instead, we are stimulating its production. (Why do you think McDonalds serves organic milk in Sweden but not here?)

I had this open in my browser for two weeks until I finally had time to watch it. PBS is such a fantastic resource, and since I rarely watch TV, having access to programs like the one I link to below is perfect.

Much of what was in this documentary is what Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was pointing toward in his speech last week.

I hope you can make some time to watch this documentary, click here then on “Watch the Full Program Online”. Yes it’s US politics, but it is truly a global issue…Go Barack!!

An interview with one of my favorite authors; Ken Wilber tells it like it is, through his brilliant integral perspective which has helped me make sense of the big questions, helped me make sense of the science vs religion arguments that just can’t be ignored in todays times. If you make it through the interview, a good chance you may just pick up one of his many books for more.

Ken Wilber Interview

an exert….

You’ve written that there’s a philosophical cold war between science and religion. Do you see them as fundamentally in conflict?

Personally, I don’t. But it depends on what you mean by science and what you mean by religion. There are at least two main types of religion. One is dependent upon a belief in a mythic or magic dogma. That is certainly what most people mean by religion. Science has pretty thoroughly dismantled the mythic religions. But virtually all the great religions themselves recognize the difference between “exoteric” or outer religion, and “esoteric” or inner religion. Inner religion tends to be more contemplative and mystical and experiential, and less cognitive and conceptual. Science is actually sympathetic with the contemplative traditions in terms of its methodology.

When you refer to mythic religions, are you talking about the kinds of stories we read in the Bible?

Or any of the world’s great religions. Laotzu was 900 years old when he was born. According to the Hindus, the earth is resting on a serpent, which is resting on an elephant, which is resting on a turtle. Those kinds of mythic approaches aren’t wrong. They’re just a stage of development. Look at [Swiss philosopher] Jean Gebser’s structural stages of development. They go from archaic to magic to mythic to rational to pluralistic to integral and higher. Magic and mythic are actual stages. They’re not wrong any more than saying “5 years old” is wrong. It’s just 5 years old. We expect there to be higher stages. There was a time when the magic and mythic approaches years ago were evolution’s leading edge of development. So we can’t belittle them.

Where do you think the scientific worldview falls short when dealing with religion?

Conventional science has correctly dismantled the pre-rational myths but it goes too far in dismantling the trans-rational. The mythic and magic approaches tend to be pre-rational and pre-verbal, but the meditative or contemplative practices tend to be trans-rational. They completely accept rationality and science. But they point out that there are deeper modes of awareness, which are scientific in their own way.

MORE

First off I have to say that I think Mr. Kennedy’s speech should have been the one that cost $200, not Clintons; I think considering the fact that Kennedy received a standing ovation and Clinton didn’t was testament to that. Both are doing amazing things for the environment, but Kennedy spoke with certain passion that I really took to.  Below will be my best regurgitation of his speech which was packed with details and facts and stats. One of the key reasons I can relate and respect Mr. Kennedy so much is his honesty about his connection to the wilderness. He states that Nature is not God, but that God communicates through Nature most clearly and powerfully, which is why all the great prophets went out in to the wilderness to allow the great teachings of the ages to come to them.

Near the beginning he remarked that he though of the US as a 14th province of Canada, a nice compliment to us Canadians; and that we must protect nature because it is the very infrastructure of community. He jumped in to the references to Kyoto, much like Clinton did, but made an interesting comparison to the Slave Trade Act. In Great Britain it made up 25% of the economy; they new it was immoral to continue with slavery but were scared to abolish it overnight as it would ruin the economy. When they did abolish it in 1807, there was an economical explosion, the slave trade was holding Britain back, and what followed was the launch of the industrial revolution. In more recent times, such as the 70’s, Iceland was one of the poorest nations, but they were one of the first to recognize the detriment of importing energy, so they kicked the habit, switch over to sustainable methods, and are now 100% sustainably energy independent. In ’96, Sweden was one of the poorest Nations, but moved to abolish carbon emmisions, which spurred entrepreneurs to come up with new solutions which boosted their economic standing to #6 in the world based on GDP. As Kennedy proclaimed “they reward efficiency and punish inefficiency while in North America we do just the opposite.”

The solutions are here, he claimed that the US has enough sunlight and wind to power the country easily, but it is tough to make prompt changes when the worst environmental government in history is in power. Kennedy went in to detailed account of just how corrupt the Bush government has been, and the key factor in this downfall has been the relationship of corporations with Government decisions. Thin Democracy as described by Frances Moore Lappe. As Jim Hightower stated “The corporations don’t have to lobby the government any more. They are the government.”   Corporations have a corosive impact if entangled with government interests. An example Kennedy used was that of the fishing license he takes out every year, and it now comes with a thick guide listing all the places that are illegal to fish in because of high levels of mercury in the fish, and so he thought to himself  “that son of a bitch George Bush”. Others in that situation, he went on to say, don’t seem to make the connection to Bush. The mercury levels in most of these lakes (go to the Waterkeeper Alliance for info, and here for mercury tests kit) is directly correlated with the over 400 illegally operating coal burning power plants who no longer have any responsibilities for their polluting actions, Bush has made that so. The regulations once in place over 7 years ago are no longer enforced. 

One example he gave (and the following below was copied from his recent article in Vanity Fair) to show just how corrupt things have been was the case of Phillip Cooney, “who was the chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality. His job was to advise the president on the environmental implications of decisions that he makes. Cooney’s previous job had been as the chief lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute. His preoccupation during his four-year White House stint, according to news accounts, was combing scientific documents issued by the various federal agencies in order to remove damaging statements about the oil industry and the coal industry. He suppressed or altered several major studies on global warming in order to protect the interests of his former clients. After the Times revealed the alterations, in 2005, Cooney left his job and went to work for ExxonMobil.”

Kennedy also said that true freemarket capitalism would be good, and we should try it sometime; right now it is the polluters who are getting rich by making others poor. He stated that 80% of republicans are actually democrats who don’t know what’s going on. He recently did a speech in Alberta for a bunch of oil execs and received a standing ovation (he said that could only happen in canada) and he had people come to him and ask how come I never heard of this before?? Well that answer opens up a new can of worms, media.

In ’88 Regan abolished the Fairness Doctrine which enforced media to use airways to serve public interest, and always tell both sides of the story so citizens can then go on to make rational decisions on critical issues. Now all major media in the US is controlled by just five major corperations, and they alone decide what is broadcast, and these are the same corperations that buy their way in to government policy making.  “There can be no true democracy with an uninformed public”, Kennedy said, and the media channels today ensure that the public remains ignorant. He also shared the obvious fact that “we as a people know more about Brad and Jennifer than that of issues that matter. We are the best entertained and least informed nation.”

Bill Clintons keynote speech lasted about 40 minutes, in which time he covered many key action items he and his team (Clinton Climate Initiative) have been working on. A quick glance around the audience showed a medium age of I would guess about 45, and many political guests were present such as the Green Party’s leader Elizabeth May, Ontario’s Premier, Minister, and many others. I was fortunate to finagle a last minute ticket which I later learned was worth $200, nice!

Clinton jumped right in to the current state of the Kyoto protocol, lamenting the USA’s failure to ratify and by saying that it is because of  the current governments insistance on “supporting yesterdays interest groups instead of investing in tomorrows energy future.” He shared the fact that the countries that are leading the Kyoto Accord are subsequently the ones that have shown the most economical growth, such as Denmark who showed a 50% (whew did I hear that correctly?) growth in their economy; or Great Britain who have taken swift action (creating plenty of new jobs) on energy efficiency and are well on their way to meeting Kyoto targets. This while the USA economy has been stagnent over the last 7 years, and any signs of job growth have been primarily linked with post 911 militarization.

He talked about the importance of citizens to take action starting with the ‘low hanging fruit’, and I’ll refer you to David Suzuki’s Nature Challenge for that.

One of his intitiatives is the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, Toronto is one of them. Essentially what they are doing is targetting large infrastructures and upgrading energy efficiency. His example was with an old low income housing community in NY City where they did a full energy audit on the buildings, the energy bill was tallied at 5 million/year. They figured they could garuntee to reduce this bill by 30%, at which point they front the money, install the new technology (whether it be efficient heating or replacing light bulbs, etc) after which the new yearly energy bill was 3.5 million, and the up front money is paid off from the energy savings, viola. He asserts that this process needs to happen on a much larger scale, and it is through the people with the ability to put this approach in to action that need to step up to the challenge, hence the C40.

He acknowledged that no matter how much we do along these lines, that if the developed nations don’t also help the 3rd world countries skip the mistakes we made, that these steps will be made in vain. Both need to happen. China for instance can’t build new coal plants fast enough, this is not good. An example of something he’d like to see in a country such as Liberia, is to have the financial support of the World Bank, and with the technology available build an energy infrastructure that is totally self sufficient, clean, and independent from other nations. If other countries could only see that this is possible, then faster action may spread. 

Another item that he admitted he was no expert on was deforestation, which contributes 18% of the worlds green house gas emissions, whew!! A big part of that is from methane which is actually worse than CO2. He asked the audience that he needed ideas on how to help combat deforestation and claimed to be able to provide the capitol to make some positive changes.

After his speech came a 20 minute Q&A style dialogue with the CEO of Green Living Enterprises, Laurie Simmond’s. Clintons last comment was that action needed to be taken immediately, not just from political leaders, but from all people, and that his generation will never forgive themselves later in life if they delay any longer. I have to agree, I have two beautiful nephews, and 30 years down the road I want to be able to look squarely in their eyes and say that I did everything I could toward creating a clean, happy planet Earth.