Visit MCJ West for Action, Updates, and More!
CONNECT

enter your email for updates

MCJ on Facebook!
MCJ West on Facebook!
Follow the MCJ on Twitter!




COP15 Gears What happened at the Copenhagen Climate Talks?
Visit Rising Tide North America's
WhatIsCOP15.net



View N30 Actions (U.S.) in a larger map

Browse by Topic

On 18 November, the Republican controlled United States House of Representatives  passed  H.R 1422 “The EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2014” by a vote of 229-191; and H.R. 4012, “The Secret Science Reform Act” by a vote of 237-190.

photo credit: Gavin Schaefer via wikimedia commons. Under a bill that has passed the US House, the people best qualified to say whether a chemical is dangerous will not be allowed to do so

photo credit: Gavin Schaefer via wikimedia commons. Under a bill that has passed the US House, the people best qualified to say whether a chemical is dangerous will not be allowed to do so

Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson (D–TX), top Democrat on the House science committee said  “These bills are the culmination of one of the most anti-science and anti-health campaigns I’ve witnessed in my 22 years as a member of Congress.”

Referring to the “Secret Science Reform Act”, Johnson said ““Let me be clear. This bill is an attempt to constrain the EPA under the guise of promoting transparency.”

According to an article posted at IFLScience about the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2014, “The Bill is designed to prevent independent scientists from advising the Environmental Protection Agency.”

Andrew Rosenberg, director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists said of the bill “The EPA SAB reform act could “turn conflict of interest on its head” by opening the door to more representation from industry scientists.”

A White House Statement says the Bill “could preclude the nomination of scientists with significant expertise in their fields.”

We can expect more of these kinds of Bills to come during the next Session of Congress.

EPA Barred From Getting Advice From Scientists

22 November, 2014 by Stephen Luntz  iflscience.com

A bill passed through the US House of Representatives is designed to prevent qualified, independent scientists from advising the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). They will be replaced with industry affiliated choices, who may or may not have relevant scientific expertise, but whose paychecks benefit from telling the EPA what their employers want to hear.

The EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB) was established in 1978 to ensure the EPA uses the most up to date and relevant scientific research for its decision making and that the EPA’s programs reflect this advice. It has served in this role, most often uncontroversially, through 36 years and six presidents. If the new bill passes the Senate and wins presidential approval, however, that is about to change.

Read the whole IFLScience Article here.

For Immediate Release:
November 25, 2014

Consumers Union Hails Recount on GMO Labeling Law in Oregon, Calls Close Vote a Major Victory for Consumers

CU-STACKED-FB-image

CU Urges Congress Not to Prohibit Consumer Right-to-Know Laws

Yonkers, NY—Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, hailed the projected recount on Oregon’s Measure 92, which would require labeling of genetically engineered food. Despite major media outlets and the opposition saying the measure had failed after the November 4 election, sustained efforts to count each vote now show that the difference is so close that a recount must take place. The ballot initiative trailed by only 809 votes in the final unofficial count released Monday night. The margin represents less than 0.1 percent of the more than 1.5 million votes cast, well within the 0.2 margin that mandates a recount. A recount will likely take place during the first two weeks in December.

“Despite the millions of dollars from big food and agribusiness companies that poured in to oppose Measure 92, hundreds of thousands of Oregon voters made their voices heard loud and clear: they want to know if their foods are genetically engineered,” said Michael Hansen, Ph.D., Senior Scientist for Consumers Union, who appeared in television ads for the Yes on 92 campaign. “The extreme closeness of this vote is a victory for consumers’ right to know what’s in their food.”

Major corporations outspent supporters of labeling by more than two to one, and are now taking their fight to Congress. A bill that would prohibit states from passing GMO labeling laws is scheduled for a hearing on December 10. “Consumers want and have a right to know what is in their food,” said Dr. Michael Hansen. “Congress should not interfere with the democratic right of consumers to enact labeling at the state level.”

Industry opponents of Measure 92, including Monsanto, DuPont, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, and Kraft Foods, among others, far outspent supporters, making this the most expensive ballot measure in the Oregon’s history. By election day, opponents had spent $20.5 million, whereas supporters spent $8 million. Monsanto, the leading producer of genetically engineered seed in the U.S., alone spent $6 million in opposition.

Measure 92 would require packaged food to indicate if it is genetically engineered. Corn, soy, canola and beet sugar are the main genetically engineered food crops grown in the U.S. GMO labeling is required in more than 60 foreign countries, but not in the U.S. Passage of Measure 92 would make Oregon the first state in the nation to pass a GMO labeling law at the ballot box.

Last year, Vermont became the first state in the nation to pass a GMO labeling bill by a state legislature. That law is scheduled to go into effect in 2016, though it is being challenged in court by the food and agriculture industries. Two other states—Connecticut and Maine—have GMO passed labeling laws, but implementation is contingent upon neighboring states passing similar legislation. Several state legislatures throughout the country are considering GMO labeling bills.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is poised to approve the sale of the first genetically modified animal (salmon), engineered to reach market weight in half the time as wild salmon, without labeling.

“Consumer concern about genetically engineered food is clearly not going away. We expect to see more bills on labeling in state legislatures in the coming year,” said Dr. Hansen.

# # #
Contact:
Naomi Starkman, nstarkman.consultant@consumer.org
917.539.3924-cell

For Immediate Release:
November 25, 2014

Consumers Union Hails Recount on GMO Labeling Law in Oregon, Calls Close Vote a Major Victory for Consumers

CU-STACKED-FB-image

CU Urges Congress Not to Prohibit Consumer Right-to-Know Laws

Yonkers, NY—Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, hailed the projected recount on Oregon’s Measure 92, which would require labeling of genetically engineered food. Despite major media outlets and the opposition saying the measure had failed after the November 4 election, sustained efforts to count each vote now show that the difference is so close that a recount must take place. The ballot initiative trailed by only 809 votes in the final unofficial count released Monday night. The margin represents less than 0.1 percent of the more than 1.5 million votes cast, well within the 0.2 margin that mandates a recount. A recount will likely take place during the first two weeks in December.

“Despite the millions of dollars from big food and agribusiness companies that poured in to oppose Measure 92, hundreds of thousands of Oregon voters made their voices heard loud and clear: they want to know if their foods are genetically engineered,” said Michael Hansen, Ph.D., Senior Scientist for Consumers Union, who appeared in television ads for the Yes on 92 campaign. “The extreme closeness of this vote is a victory for consumers’ right to know what’s in their food.”

Major corporations outspent supporters of labeling by more than two to one, and are now taking their fight to Congress. A bill that would prohibit states from passing GMO labeling laws is scheduled for a hearing on December 10. “Consumers want and have a right to know what is in their food,” said Dr. Michael Hansen. “Congress should not interfere with the democratic right of consumers to enact labeling at the state level.”

Industry opponents of Measure 92, including Monsanto, DuPont, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, and Kraft Foods, among others, far outspent supporters, making this the most expensive ballot measure in the Oregon’s history. By election day, opponents had spent $20.5 million, whereas supporters spent $8 million. Monsanto, the leading producer of genetically engineered seed in the U.S., alone spent $6 million in opposition.

Measure 92 would require packaged food to indicate if it is genetically engineered. Corn, soy, canola and beet sugar are the main genetically engineered food crops grown in the U.S. GMO labeling is required in more than 60 foreign countries, but not in the U.S. Passage of Measure 92 would make Oregon the first state in the nation to pass a GMO labeling law at the ballot box.

Last year, Vermont became the first state in the nation to pass a GMO labeling bill by a state legislature. That law is scheduled to go into effect in 2016, though it is being challenged in court by the food and agriculture industries. Two other states—Connecticut and Maine—have GMO passed labeling laws, but implementation is contingent upon neighboring states passing similar legislation. Several state legislatures throughout the country are considering GMO labeling bills.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is poised to approve the sale of the first genetically modified animal (salmon), engineered to reach market weight in half the time as wild salmon, without labeling.

“Consumer concern about genetically engineered food is clearly not going away. We expect to see more bills on labeling in state legislatures in the coming year,” said Dr. Hansen.

# # #
Contact:
Naomi Starkman, nstarkman.consultant@consumer.org
917.539.3924-cell

For Immediate Release:
November 25, 2014

Consumers Union Hails Recount on GMO Labeling Law in Oregon, Calls Close Vote a Major Victory for Consumers

CU-STACKED-FB-image

CU Urges Congress Not to Prohibit Consumer Right-to-Know Laws

Yonkers, NY—Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, hailed the projected recount on Oregon’s Measure 92, which would require labeling of genetically engineered food. Despite major media outlets and the opposition saying the measure had failed after the November 4 election, sustained efforts to count each vote now show that the difference is so close that a recount must take place. The ballot initiative trailed by only 809 votes in the final unofficial count released Monday night. The margin represents less than 0.1 percent of the more than 1.5 million votes cast, well within the 0.2 margin that mandates a recount. A recount will likely take place during the first two weeks in December.

“Despite the millions of dollars from big food and agribusiness companies that poured in to oppose Measure 92, hundreds of thousands of Oregon voters made their voices heard loud and clear: they want to know if their foods are genetically engineered,” said Michael Hansen, Ph.D., Senior Scientist for Consumers Union, who appeared in television ads for the Yes on 92 campaign. “The extreme closeness of this vote is a victory for consumers’ right to know what’s in their food.”

Major corporations outspent supporters of labeling by more than two to one, and are now taking their fight to Congress. A bill that would prohibit states from passing GMO labeling laws is scheduled for a hearing on December 10. “Consumers want and have a right to know what is in their food,” said Dr. Michael Hansen. “Congress should not interfere with the democratic right of consumers to enact labeling at the state level.”

Industry opponents of Measure 92, including Monsanto, DuPont, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, and Kraft Foods, among others, far outspent supporters, making this the most expensive ballot measure in the Oregon’s history. By election day, opponents had spent $20.5 million, whereas supporters spent $8 million. Monsanto, the leading producer of genetically engineered seed in the U.S., alone spent $6 million in opposition.

Measure 92 would require packaged food to indicate if it is genetically engineered. Corn, soy, canola and beet sugar are the main genetically engineered food crops grown in the U.S. GMO labeling is required in more than 60 foreign countries, but not in the U.S. Passage of Measure 92 would make Oregon the first state in the nation to pass a GMO labeling law at the ballot box.

Last year, Vermont became the first state in the nation to pass a GMO labeling bill by a state legislature. That law is scheduled to go into effect in 2016, though it is being challenged in court by the food and agriculture industries. Two other states—Connecticut and Maine—have GMO passed labeling laws, but implementation is contingent upon neighboring states passing similar legislation. Several state legislatures throughout the country are considering GMO labeling bills.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is poised to approve the sale of the first genetically modified animal (salmon), engineered to reach market weight in half the time as wild salmon, without labeling.

“Consumer concern about genetically engineered food is clearly not going away. We expect to see more bills on labeling in state legislatures in the coming year,” said Dr. Hansen.

# # #
Contact:
Naomi Starkman, nstarkman.consultant@consumer.org
917.539.3924-cell

For Immediate Release:
November 25, 2014

Consumers Union Hails Recount on GMO Labeling Law in Oregon, Calls Close Vote a Major Victory for Consumers

CU-STACKED-FB-image

CU Urges Congress Not to Prohibit Consumer Right-to-Know Laws

Yonkers, NY—Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, hailed the projected recount on Oregon’s Measure 92, which would require labeling of genetically engineered food. Despite major media outlets and the opposition saying the measure had failed after the November 4 election, sustained efforts to count each vote now show that the difference is so close that a recount must take place. The ballot initiative trailed by only 809 votes in the final unofficial count released Monday night. The margin represents less than 0.1 percent of the more than 1.5 million votes cast, well within the 0.2 margin that mandates a recount. A recount will likely take place during the first two weeks in December.

“Despite the millions of dollars from big food and agribusiness companies that poured in to oppose Measure 92, hundreds of thousands of Oregon voters made their voices heard loud and clear: they want to know if their foods are genetically engineered,” said Michael Hansen, Ph.D., Senior Scientist for Consumers Union, who appeared in television ads for the Yes on 92 campaign. “The extreme closeness of this vote is a victory for consumers’ right to know what’s in their food.”

Major corporations outspent supporters of labeling by more than two to one, and are now taking their fight to Congress. A bill that would prohibit states from passing GMO labeling laws is scheduled for a hearing on December 10. “Consumers want and have a right to know what is in their food,” said Dr. Michael Hansen. “Congress should not interfere with the democratic right of consumers to enact labeling at the state level.”

Industry opponents of Measure 92, including Monsanto, DuPont, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, and Kraft Foods, among others, far outspent supporters, making this the most expensive ballot measure in the Oregon’s history. By election day, opponents had spent $20.5 million, whereas supporters spent $8 million. Monsanto, the leading producer of genetically engineered seed in the U.S., alone spent $6 million in opposition.

Measure 92 would require packaged food to indicate if it is genetically engineered. Corn, soy, canola and beet sugar are the main genetically engineered food crops grown in the U.S. GMO labeling is required in more than 60 foreign countries, but not in the U.S. Passage of Measure 92 would make Oregon the first state in the nation to pass a GMO labeling law at the ballot box.

Last year, Vermont became the first state in the nation to pass a GMO labeling bill by a state legislature. That law is scheduled to go into effect in 2016, though it is being challenged in court by the food and agriculture industries. Two other states—Connecticut and Maine—have GMO passed labeling laws, but implementation is contingent upon neighboring states passing similar legislation. Several state legislatures throughout the country are considering GMO labeling bills.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is poised to approve the sale of the first genetically modified animal (salmon), engineered to reach market weight in half the time as wild salmon, without labeling.

“Consumer concern about genetically engineered food is clearly not going away. We expect to see more bills on labeling in state legislatures in the coming year,” said Dr. Hansen.

# # #
Contact:
Naomi Starkman, nstarkman.consultant@consumer.org
917.539.3924-cell

A young man with Ebola symptoms walks to a van waiting to take away several patients for treatment after the village's chief ordered people to cooperate with medical staff and remove the sick from their homes, in Dandano, Guinea, Nov. 3, 2014. (Photo: Samuel Aranda / The New York Times) via Truthout

A young man with Ebola symptoms walks to a van waiting to take away several patients for treatment after the village’s chief ordered people to cooperate with medical staff and remove the sick from their homes, in Dandano, Guinea, Nov. 3, 2014. (Photo: Samuel Aranda / The New York Times) via Truthout

Jeff Conant interviewed Silas Siakor, director of Sustainable Development Institute/Friends of the Earth Liberia, on the link between the Ebola epidemic and the ruthless exploitation of forest resources in the region.

The devastation of Ebola in West Africa is tied to the region’s deforestation. To generate awareness of the links, Jeff Conant, director of FOE’s international forests campaign, interviewed Silas Siakor of Sustainable Development Institute/Friends of the Earth, Liberia. The interview addresses key topics for us at GJEP and Climate Connections regarding deforestation: logging (illegal and otherwise), industrial agriculture, oil palm, and biofuels.

Deforestation, “Development” Connected to Spread of Ebola in West Africa

By Jeff Conant, Truthout. 24 November 2014.

It is clear that the spread of Ebola in West Africa is directly linked to the region’s deep poverty: Out of 187 countries on the United Nations’ Human Development Index, Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone rank 175th, 179th and 183rd, respectively. But, while it is easy to recognize the links between poverty and the spread of the virus, there has been little focus on the root causes of the region’s impoverishment itself.

Read the whole interview here!

There are more than 7 billion people on this planet, and our population is growing faster than most projections predicted. According to an article on Farm Land Grab, this means that land and water are becoming more valuable commodities, carrying a future price tag that governments and global businesses are trying to get in on as early as possible. Reporter Brad Plumer explains why population growth has inspired  corporations to jump on international land grabs that destroy ecosystems, devastate indigenous people and further accelerate the destruction of climate change.

Infographic: www.farmlandgrab.org

Infographic: www.farmlandgrab.org

Why Wall Street investors and Chinese firms are buying farmland all over the world
by Brad Plumer, Farm Land Grab, 21 November 2014

As the world’s population soars past 7 billion, farmland and freshwater are becoming increasingly valuable resources.

Critics worry that the trade has spurred a rise in ‘land grabbing’

And, in response, a growing number of companies and investors — Wall Street traders, Chinese state corporations, Gulf sheiks — have been buying up farmland abroad. The trade has been booming since 2007, when a spike in grain prices got everyone fretting about shortages. The purchases help countries like China and Saudi Arabia secure food supplies and conserve water domestically. But critics worry that the trade has also spurred a rise in “land grabs” — when sellers in countries like Ethiopia or Cambodia forcibly acquire the farmland from locals in the first place.

So how big is the trade? A new study in Environmental Research Letters finds that at least 126 countries are now involved in purchasing or selling global farmland. The most active buyers are investors in the United States, China, Britain, Germany, India, and the Netherlands. They’re typically seeking out land in South America, Africa, and Asia — particularly Brazil, Ethiopia, Philippines, Sudan, Madagascar, Mozambique, and Tanzania.

Get the rest of the story at www.farmlandgrab.org.

There are more than 7 billion people on this planet, and our population is growing faster than most projections predicted. According to an article on Farm Land Grab, this means that land and water are becoming more valuable commodities, carrying a future price tag that governments and global businesses are trying to get in on as early as possible. Reporter Brad Plumer explains why population growth has inspired  corporations to jump on international land grabs that destroy ecosystems, devastate indigenous people and further accelerate the destruction of climate change.

Infographic: www.farmlandgrab.org

Infographic: www.farmlandgrab.org

Why Wall Street investors and Chinese firms are buying farmland all over the world
by Brad Plumer, Farm Land Grab, 21 November 2014

As the world’s population soars past 7 billion, farmland and freshwater are becoming increasingly valuable resources.

Critics worry that the trade has spurred a rise in ‘land grabbing’

And, in response, a growing number of companies and investors — Wall Street traders, Chinese state corporations, Gulf sheiks — have been buying up farmland abroad. The trade has been booming since 2007, when a spike in grain prices got everyone fretting about shortages. The purchases help countries like China and Saudi Arabia secure food supplies and conserve water domestically. But critics worry that the trade has also spurred a rise in “land grabs” — when sellers in countries like Ethiopia or Cambodia forcibly acquire the farmland from locals in the first place.

So how big is the trade? A new study in Environmental Research Letters finds that at least 126 countries are now involved in purchasing or selling global farmland. The most active buyers are investors in the United States, China, Britain, Germany, India, and the Netherlands. They’re typically seeking out land in South America, Africa, and Asia — particularly Brazil, Ethiopia, Philippines, Sudan, Madagascar, Mozambique, and Tanzania.

Get the rest of the story at www.farmlandgrab.org.

There are more than 7 billion people on this planet, and our population is growing faster than most projections predicted. According to an article on Farm Land Grab, this means that land and water are becoming more valuable commodities, carrying a future price tag that governments and global businesses are trying to get in on as early as possible. Reporter Brad Plumer explains why population growth has inspired  corporations to jump on international land grabs that destroy ecosystems, devastate indigenous people and further accelerate the destruction of climate change.

Infographic: www.farmlandgrab.org

Infographic: www.farmlandgrab.org

Why Wall Street investors and Chinese firms are buying farmland all over the world
by Brad Plumer, Farm Land Grab, 21 November 2014

As the world’s population soars past 7 billion, farmland and freshwater are becoming increasingly valuable resources.

Critics worry that the trade has spurred a rise in ‘land grabbing’

And, in response, a growing number of companies and investors — Wall Street traders, Chinese state corporations, Gulf sheiks — have been buying up farmland abroad. The trade has been booming since 2007, when a spike in grain prices got everyone fretting about shortages. The purchases help countries like China and Saudi Arabia secure food supplies and conserve water domestically. But critics worry that the trade has also spurred a rise in “land grabs” — when sellers in countries like Ethiopia or Cambodia forcibly acquire the farmland from locals in the first place.

So how big is the trade? A new study in Environmental Research Letters finds that at least 126 countries are now involved in purchasing or selling global farmland. The most active buyers are investors in the United States, China, Britain, Germany, India, and the Netherlands. They’re typically seeking out land in South America, Africa, and Asia — particularly Brazil, Ethiopia, Philippines, Sudan, Madagascar, Mozambique, and Tanzania.

Get the rest of the story at www.farmlandgrab.org.

imgresOn November 13th, Adam Briggle of Frack Free Denton spoke to Margaret Prescod for Sojourner Truth’s Earth Watch.

On election day, Denton passed a fracking ban, making it the first in Texas to ban further hydraulic fracturing. Only days later, they received push back. Denton is preparing for an extended court battle  — a fight that cities nationwide considering similar laws will likely be watching closely.

Adam Briggle is Vice President of the Denton Drilling Awareness Group, which led the Frack Free Denton campaign to successfully ban hydraulic fracturing in the city limits of Denton, Texas. He is also an Associate Professor of Philosophy and Faculty Fellow at the Center for the Study of Interdisciplinarity at the University of North Texas. He is writing a book about fracking and Denton for Liveright Press.

In the interview, Briggle explained what led to the ban and what they expect to happen next. Regarding what others might take away from this victory in Denton, Briggle defended the rights of  communities to make decisions: “Those most vulnerable to the harm should have the greatest say.”

http://frackfreedenton.com/2014/11/what-we-just-did/

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/11/10/3590690/texas-fracking-ban-denton/


http://climate-connections.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ST_11-13-14_Adam_Briggle.mp3

Earth Watch is coordinated by GJEP in partnership with KPFK’s Sojourner Truth show with Margaret Prescod.

Sandra Steingraber is a New York State anti-natural gas activist extraordinaire, teacher, eco-biologist, author, and parent. She is also a cancer survivor–a cancer linked to drinking water contamination. She has written several books including Living Downstream: an Ecologists Personal Investigation of Cancer and the Environment, and Raising Elijah: Protecting Children in an Age of Environmental Crisis. The book is named after her son and is about all of our children, ourselves, and our friends and families that are being raised and living on the contemporary earth. In it she reminds us that there are thousands of human made toxic chemicals, including at least 200 known brain poisons that flow freely.

Today Steingraber is in jail, again, standing up for all of us. She is defending us against a corporate economic culture that cares about profit and expansion and not much else. A few years back, when she was in the Chemung County Jail, that time over an “Earth Day” remembrance, she said about her choice to go to jail:  “A heroic narrative is a substantial one. Against all odds, it is possible that standing up can make a difference. Every person has the opportunity to have a heroic narrative in their lives, and so when our children ask- Are we going to die, it is the beginning of a heroic narrative to say, No–I am on the job, I will help make a difference.”

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Steingraber published a new letter from the Chemung County Jail in EcoWatch on 21 November 2014. An excerpt from “Why I am in Jail” is below.

I have come to believe that a successful civil disobedience campaign [..] depends on the willingness of at least some of us to gladly accept jail time over other kinds of sentences, such as paying fines.

There are four reasons for this. First, it shows respect for the law. In my case, I was arrested for trespassing on the driveway of a Texas-based energy company that has the sole intention of turning the crumbling salt mines underneath the hillside into massive gas tanks for the highly-pressurized products of fracking: methane, propane and butane. (The part of the plan involving methane storage has already been approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). Even before the infrastructure for this gas storage is built, Crestwood Midstream has polluted the lake with salt, at levels that exceed its legal limits. Crestwood’s response is to pay a fine and keep polluting. By contrast, I refuse to pay a fine to excuse my crime and so accepted the lawful consequences of my actions.

Read the entire letter from jail here.

 

 

 

Sandra Steingraber is a New York State anti-natural gas activist extraordinaire, teacher, eco-biologist, author, and parent. She is also a cancer survivor–a cancer linked to drinking water contamination. She has written several books including Living Downstream: an Ecologists Personal Investigation of Cancer and the Environment, and Raising Elijah: Protecting Children in an Age of Environmental Crisis. The book is named after her son and is about all of our children, ourselves, and our friends and families that are being raised and living on the contemporary earth. In it she reminds us that there are thousands of human made toxic chemicals, including at least 200 known brain poisons that flow freely.

Today Steingraber is in jail, again, standing up for all of us. She is defending us against a corporate economic culture that cares about profit and expansion and not much else. A few years back, when she was in the Chemung County Jail, that time over an “Earth Day” remembrance, she said about her choice to go to jail:  “A heroic narrative is a substantial one. Against all odds, it is possible that standing up can make a difference. Every person has the opportunity to have a heroic narrative in their lives, and so when our children ask- Are we going to die, it is the beginning of a heroic narrative to say, No–I am on the job, I will help make a difference.”

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Steingraber published a new letter from the Chemung County Jail in EcoWatch on 21 November 2014. An excerpt from “Why I am in Jail” is below.

I have come to believe that a successful civil disobedience campaign [..] depends on the willingness of at least some of us to gladly accept jail time over other kinds of sentences, such as paying fines.

There are four reasons for this. First, it shows respect for the law. In my case, I was arrested for trespassing on the driveway of a Texas-based energy company that has the sole intention of turning the crumbling salt mines underneath the hillside into massive gas tanks for the highly-pressurized products of fracking: methane, propane and butane. (The part of the plan involving methane storage has already been approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). Even before the infrastructure for this gas storage is built, Crestwood Midstream has polluted the lake with salt, at levels that exceed its legal limits. Crestwood’s response is to pay a fine and keep polluting. By contrast, I refuse to pay a fine to excuse my crime and so accepted the lawful consequences of my actions.

Read the entire letter from jail here.

 

 

 

Sandra Steingraber is a New York State anti-natural gas activist extraordinaire, teacher, eco-biologist, author, and parent. She is also a cancer survivor–a cancer linked to drinking water contamination. She has written several books including Living Downstream: an Ecologists Personal Investigation of Cancer and the Environment, and Raising Elijah: Protecting Children in an Age of Environmental Crisis. The book is named after her son and is about all of our children, ourselves, and our friends and families that are being raised and living on the contemporary earth. In it she reminds us that there are thousands of human made toxic chemicals, including at least 200 known brain poisons that flow freely.

Today Steingraber is in jail, again, standing up for all of us. She is defending us against a corporate economic culture that cares about profit and expansion and not much else. A few years back, when she was in the Chemung County Jail, that time over an “Earth Day” remembrance, she said about her choice to go to jail:  “A heroic narrative is a substantial one. Against all odds, it is possible that standing up can make a difference. Every person has the opportunity to have a heroic narrative in their lives, and so when our children ask- Are we going to die, it is the beginning of a heroic narrative to say, No–I am on the job, I will help make a difference.”

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Steingraber published a new letter from the Chemung County Jail in EcoWatch on 21 November 2014. An excerpt from “Why I am in Jail” is below.

I have come to believe that a successful civil disobedience campaign [..] depends on the willingness of at least some of us to gladly accept jail time over other kinds of sentences, such as paying fines.

There are four reasons for this. First, it shows respect for the law. In my case, I was arrested for trespassing on the driveway of a Texas-based energy company that has the sole intention of turning the crumbling salt mines underneath the hillside into massive gas tanks for the highly-pressurized products of fracking: methane, propane and butane. (The part of the plan involving methane storage has already been approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). Even before the infrastructure for this gas storage is built, Crestwood Midstream has polluted the lake with salt, at levels that exceed its legal limits. Crestwood’s response is to pay a fine and keep polluting. By contrast, I refuse to pay a fine to excuse my crime and so accepted the lawful consequences of my actions.

Read the entire letter from jail here.

 

 

 

Sandra Steingraber is a New York State anti-natural gas activist extraordinaire, teacher, eco-biologist, author, and parent. She is also a cancer survivor–a cancer linked to drinking water contamination. She has written several books including Living Downstream: an Ecologists Personal Investigation of Cancer and the Environment, and Raising Elijah: Protecting Children in an Age of Environmental Crisis. The book is named after her son and is about all of our children, ourselves, and our friends and families that are being raised and living on the contemporary earth. In it she reminds us that there are thousands of human made toxic chemicals, including at least 200 known brain poisons that flow freely.

Today Steingraber is in jail, again, standing up for all of us. She is defending us against a corporate economic culture that cares about profit and expansion and not much else. A few years back, when she was in the Chemung County Jail, that time over an “Earth Day” remembrance, she said about her choice to go to jail:  “A heroic narrative is a substantial one. Against all odds, it is possible that standing up can make a difference. Every person has the opportunity to have a heroic narrative in their lives, and so when our children ask- Are we going to die, it is the beginning of a heroic narrative to say, No–I am on the job, I will help make a difference.”

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Steingraber published a new letter from the Chemung County Jail in EcoWatch on 21 November 2014. An excerpt from “Why I am in Jail” is below.

I have come to believe that a successful civil disobedience campaign [..] depends on the willingness of at least some of us to gladly accept jail time over other kinds of sentences, such as paying fines.

There are four reasons for this. First, it shows respect for the law. In my case, I was arrested for trespassing on the driveway of a Texas-based energy company that has the sole intention of turning the crumbling salt mines underneath the hillside into massive gas tanks for the highly-pressurized products of fracking: methane, propane and butane. (The part of the plan involving methane storage has already been approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). Even before the infrastructure for this gas storage is built, Crestwood Midstream has polluted the lake with salt, at levels that exceed its legal limits. Crestwood’s response is to pay a fine and keep polluting. By contrast, I refuse to pay a fine to excuse my crime and so accepted the lawful consequences of my actions.

Read the entire letter from jail here.

 

 

 

Sandra Steingraber is a New York State anti-natural gas activist extraordinaire, teacher, eco-biologist, author, and parent. She is also a cancer survivor–a cancer linked to drinking water contamination. She has written several books including Living Downstream: an Ecologists Personal Investigation of Cancer and the Environment, and Raising Elijah: Protecting Children in an Age of Environmental Crisis. The book is named after her son and is about all of our children, ourselves, and our friends and families that are being raised and living on the contemporary earth. In it she reminds us that there are thousands of human made toxic chemicals, including at least 200 known brain poisons that flow freely.

Today Steingraber is in jail, again, standing up for all of us. She is defending us against a corporate economic culture that cares about profit and expansion and not much else. A few years back, when she was in the Chemung County Jail, that time over an “Earth Day” remembrance, she said about her choice to go to jail:  “A heroic narrative is a substantial one. Against all odds, it is possible that standing up can make a difference. Every person has the opportunity to have a heroic narrative in their lives, and so when our children ask- Are we going to die, it is the beginning of a heroic narrative to say, No–I am on the job, I will help make a difference.”

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Sandra Steingraber wrote this letter for EcoWatch from the Chemung County Jail this morning to share with our readers and beyond.

Steingraber published a new letter from the Chemung County Jail in EcoWatch on 21 November 2014. An excerpt from “Why I am in Jail” is below.

I have come to believe that a successful civil disobedience campaign [..] depends on the willingness of at least some of us to gladly accept jail time over other kinds of sentences, such as paying fines.

There are four reasons for this. First, it shows respect for the law. In my case, I was arrested for trespassing on the driveway of a Texas-based energy company that has the sole intention of turning the crumbling salt mines underneath the hillside into massive gas tanks for the highly-pressurized products of fracking: methane, propane and butane. (The part of the plan involving methane storage has already been approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). Even before the infrastructure for this gas storage is built, Crestwood Midstream has polluted the lake with salt, at levels that exceed its legal limits. Crestwood’s response is to pay a fine and keep polluting. By contrast, I refuse to pay a fine to excuse my crime and so accepted the lawful consequences of my actions.

Read the entire letter from jail here.