I hike the foothills, camp in Idaho's mountains and work hard in Idaho's Capitol. I want to ensure the longevity and vivacity Boise encapsulates and promises to only wisely expand upon. Simply put: we can do better than fracking for our future fuels.

EnergizeRI and our carbon pricing proposal have recently come under attack from the Heartland Institute. We are taking this opportunity to reach out, set the record straight and shed some light on the work and reputation of this group as you consider their comments on carbon pricing legislation here in Rhode Island. The non-profit Heartland Institute claims it was created to "discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems." However, upon review of the organization's body of work, it is clear they operate on a platform of climate change denial. In fact, the organization is well known as one of the nation's leading climate change deniers. They are a think tank funded by groups such as the Koch Brothers, Big Tobacco, and Exxon Mobile. The only thing that Heartland seems to promote is misinformation. This is the same group that included scientists on a list of "climate deniers" even after they claimed they were being misrepresented and asked to be removed. This is the same group that to this day denies the link between secondhand smoke and cancer, claiming "smoking in moderation has few, if any, adverse health effects." Heartland's interest is clearly not in "finding and promoting ideas that empower people" as they claim but instead to allow their funders to manipulate credible sources and scientific facts. They manipulate the public to their own benefit and operate without repercussions. To be very clear, we here at EnergizeRI are proud to have a group like the Heartland Institute as critics. We are even prouder to share that distinction with people like Pope Francis and President Obama. There are legitimate debates to be had about the best way to address climate change, but pretending it isn't happening or that we are powerless to stop it helps no one. We are already seeing the effects of climate change here in our state. No Rhode Islander will deny the damage that was caused by Hurricane Sandy in Westerly and Charlestown. No one can deny the damage caused by the microbursts in Cranston or the severe flooding witnessed in Warwick. All over the state Rhode Islanders are dealing with the damage caused by climate change and leading climate scientists believe it will only get worse. Climate change denial is no longer part of the national conversation and it should not be part of the policy debate here in Rhode Island. As President Obama himself said, "if anybody still wants to dispute the science around climate change, have at it, you'll be pretty lonely because you'll be debating our military, most of America's business leaders, the majority of the American people, almost the entire scientific community and 200 nations around the world who agree it’s a problem and intend to solve it." All studies completed on our proposal to this point have shown that Carbon Pricing would create, not reduce jobs. The EnergizeRI Act is projected to add about 2,000 new jobs in the first few years alone and about 4,000 in total. The reasons for this are fairly simple. Rather than sending money that Rhode Islanders spend on fossil fuels each year to Texas or Saudi Arabia, the act redirects those funds into our own local economy. The act uses those funds to make investments in solar and wind as well as weatherization and other energy efficiency measures. The act makes investments into the fastest growing sector of our state’s economy: clean energy. Finally, carbon pricing is recognized worldwide as one of the most effective emissions reductions tools. Seventy-four countries, 23 subnational jurisdictions, and more than 1,000 companies and investors expressed support for a price on carbon ahead of the UN Secretary-General's Climate Summit. Locally, the REMI study estimates that carbon pricing, as proposed in the EnergizeRI Act, would get us halfway to the Resilient RI goals all on its own. Sign this Petition and tell our government that groups like Heartland have no place in conversations about our future.

We fully support MV@play and their proposal. We understand that the High-grade synthetic Turf with organic infill is the Best option for safe and durable playing fields.

Water quality is crucial to all life on Earth. Amendment 1 and HB 937 would take away the voice of the people to help protect MO water.

Judge: State should grant Clean Harbor permit, with caveat • By MARISSA BARNETT The Daily News • http://www.galvnews.com/news/article_73e95ea6-1797-5681-a9af-37f352a94b2d.html#comments SAN LEON A company seeking to dump treated wastewater into a tributary flowing in Dickinson Bayou failed to include certain testing required by law in its permit application, a state administrative judge ruled. The application should be granted by the state’s environmental agency, but only if the state inserts a legally required request for testing and monitoring of the discharged waste, Administrative Judge Joanne Summerhays said. Clean Harbors San Leon Inc. in May 2015 applied for an amendment to its existing permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to discharge up to 105,000 gallons of treated wastewater and treated stormwater each day into a tributary on its property that flows to Dickinson Bayou. The proposal quickly drew the ire of neighboring property owners and residents, particularly in San Leon, who worried the company’s plan will further pollute the bayou. A coalition of residents, including local oyster company owners and representatives of the San Leon Municipal Utility District, protested and sought a hearing from the State Office of Administrative Hearings, which considers disputes over permits. In a proposal for decision published April 24, the administrative judge ruled the draft permit had not required Clean Harbors to conduct whole effluent toxicity testing, or WET as it’s called, on its discharged wastewater, which is a violation of state code. The judge recommended the amendment be accepted, but with the requirement. The environmental commission will ultimately make the call on the amendment to the permit, but it weighs the administrative judge’s proposal. The state had almost allowed a company to dump more wastewater into unnamed waterways with little oversight or regulation over how it affects the environment, said Lisa Halili, an owner of Prestige Oysters in San Leon. People who protested the plan celebrated the move as a step in the right direction because it requires hazardous waste companies doing business in Galveston County to have some accountability in protecting the waterways. “The recommendation to include WET testing is a very big win because it will require Clean Harbors to constantly monitor potential toxicity in receiving waters,” said Joe Manchaca, president of the San Leon Municipal Utility District. The testing measures the toxic effects of pollutants on species specific to the area where it’s dumped, Summerhays said. “WET testing is an integral tool in the assessment of water quality for the protection of aquatic life because it can measure both chronic and acute impacts on the survival, reproduction, or growth of test organisms,” Summerhays wrote. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality will review the proposal for decision and submit responses if there are any concerns or disagreements, agency spokeswoman Andrea Morrow said. Once the process is complete, it will be scheduled for a monthly agenda meeting, Morrow said. The commissioners will then decide on the application, Morrow said. Marissa Barnett: 409-683-5257; [email protected] The San Leon community is opposed to this permit because we do not want Dickinson Bay poisoned by Clean Harbors. In San Leon everyone loves this area to fish, catch shrimp and oysters and enjoy all aspects of water recreation in this bay. The pollution from this project will ruin our way of life, poisoning our seafood and must not be allowed. We can not allow Clean Harbors to dump 12,000 pounds of oily grease in our bay each year. We are a small unincorporated area easily taken advantage of by corporate bullies who look to prey on rural areas such as ours. It is time to take a stand for communities and families and stop poisoning our water. The state of Texas needs to be held accountable for the decisions made on behalf of its citizens. Tell the TCEQ do not rubber stamp this Clean Harbors San Leon permit. There are so many people now entering this cause that I believe that the folks fighting for Dickinson Bayou have a good fighting chance of winning. People, we need you now more than ever in this cause to protect Dickinson Bayou. Please email Ann Bright of Texas Parks and Wildlife at [email protected] and let her know that you do not want any more harmful chemicals dumped into our bayou. You do not have to live here to support this cause. If you eat shrimp, crabs, oysters or fish, or like fishing, boating or water recreation, you need to support this. It only takes a minute or two to email Texas Parks and Wildlife to help save this bayou. http://www.coastmonthly.com/2016/12/accidental-activist/ http://seabreezenews.com/issues/2016%20issues/1216%20-%20December%202016/Page_01c.pdf

On April 4, 2016, MV@Play and Gale Associates presented to the MVRHS school committee a $12-million proposal to build a centralized athletic facility on a 3.6-acre parcel of land on the MVRHS campus. Funding would initially come from private donors, but MVRHS, and all six Island towns, would be expected to pay for future upkeep. The plans, designed to be implemented in three phases, the first beginning as early as September 1, 2016, include the installation of four artificial turf playing fields: one inside the track, plus three others. The intent is to eventually host all soccer, lacrosse, field hockey, and football practices and games (from the youngest players through high school and adult leagues) there for decades to come. From financial, maintenance, health, environmental, and playability perspectives alike, natural grass is a far better choice. Artificial turf fields are not as low-maintenance nor as cost-effective as their billion-dollar industry suggests. According to Gale Associates, installation costs for a new artificial turf field with GreenPlay infill costs $850,000, assumes a 14-year carpet life, and the only maintenance is grooming with a towed groomer 4-5 times per year. The limited warranty covers only 8 years, however, and can be voided for a multitude of common conditions/maintenance practices. The life cycle costs of natural grass fields, when compared to those of artificial turf, are essentially the same—assuming the artificial carpet lasts 6 extra years after warranty expiration, and the cost of replacement doesn’t rise. Not mentioned: the premature failure rate of artificial turf fields, the costs of replenishing the infill, whether we would switch to crumb rubber if the GreenPlay infill becomes moldy, the intensive maintenance costs and practices necessary to keep the carpet sanitary and safe—including sweeping up debris like trash and leaves, brushing to straighten fibers, deep raking to loosen infill, spraying disinfectant and anti-static chemicals, manual removal of gum (with a solvent, then hand-pried out of the fibers), cleaning of spilled drinks, vomit, spit, sweat, blood, and animal droppings (dog, goose, etc.), and repairing loose seams to avoid liability issues. Given the exorbitant costs and many complications associated with artificial turf fields, it would be highly irresponsible for MVRHS to assume financial responsibility for their upkeep. Forbes. “Buyers’ Remorse Surfacing over Artificial Turf Fields.” October 23, 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2014/10/22/buyers-remorse-surfacing-over-artificial-turf-fields/#7203e2c321ff City Limits. “NYC’s Fake Grass Gamble: A $300 Million Mistake?” August 24, 2010. Winner of the 2010 Sigma Delta Chi Award for Investigative Reporting. http://www.spjvideo.org/sdx/sdx10/mag-inv-reporting-r.pdf Red Hen Turf. “The Dirt on Turf: What You Need to Know About Synthetic Turf and Natural Grass for Athletic Fields.” http://redhenturf.com/pdfs/TheTruthAboutArtificialTurf.pdf Artificial turf fields are not safe. According to Mount Sinai Hospital Children’s Environmental Health Center, “All components of an artificial turf field (fiber blades, infill, backing, colorants, sealants, antimicrobials, and flame retardants) contain potential chemicals of concern and can leach from the product.” They urge extra caution when the site is in close proximity to a water source potentially contaminated by chemical leaching, as MVRHS is (directly above the Island’s sole source aquifer). Further, the antimicrobials and fungicides required to routinely sanitize the fields “not only increase the likelihood of chemical exposures, they may pose health risks for children chronically exposed to them.” Although the newly proposed infill is labeled “organic,” such terms are not regulated in the turf industry, nor are manufacturers required to list all chemicals. Risk of joint injuries, turf burns, “turf toe,” and heat-related complications are proven to be more likely on artificial turf, and it is a fertile breeding ground for harmful bacteria including those that cause antibiotic-resistant infections such as MRSA. Artificial turf also denies our children hours of time that would otherwise have been spent on grass and dirt, the immunological and psychological benefits of which are well documented. Mount Sinai Hospital Children’s Environmental Health Center. “Artificial Turf: A Health-Based Consumer Guide.” February 2016. http://media.wix.com/ugd/fd0a19_f5aa0824698341499b4228ebabf90cb5.pdf Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “MRSA and the Workplace.” August 27, 2015. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/mrsa/ (Note: the artificial turf proposed for MVRHS would likely qualify for all five C’s of the MRSA risk factors.) Most athletes dislike playing on artificial turf. From professional athletes down to the youth level, the majority of players regard artificial turf as a second-tier playing surface. This strong preference is based on increased post-game recovery time, risk of injury, and heat stroke on artificial turf, as well as a fundamental preference for playing the sport on grass. These issues led a group of international soccer players to file a lawsuit against FIFA for forcing them to play the 2015 Women’s World Cup on artificial turf. Lawsuit against FIFA and the Canadian Soccer Association regarding the use of artificial turf at the Women’s 2015 World Cup. http://equalizersoccer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/141001_2_Application-Sec-24-Schedule-A.pdf Change.org. “FIFA: The World Cup Should Be Played on Natural Grass.” https://www.coworker.org/petitions/fifa-the-world-cup-should-be-played-on-natural-grass (Note: more than 70 national team players from 17 countries signed this petition.) BMC Sports Science, Medicine, and Rehabilitation. “The Perceptions of Professional Soccer Players on the Risk of Injury from Competition and Training on Natural Grass and 3rd Generation Artificial Turf.” March 2014. http://bm...

Corporate interests rule everything in america, from television to congress. There are a few safe spaces left, and the national parks are one of them. If this deal goes through, and Jarvis is allowed to stay in his post, we move past the point of no return.

New Jersey is the nation’s most densely populated state, and we’re running out of open space. Back in 2014, voters took action to keep parks, farms, and historic areas from being developed. But that dedicated money for open space has been accruing in the Treasury and can’t be spent predictably until Governor Christie signs the Open Space Implementation Bill. Once this bill becomes law, New Jersey will have reliable, dedicated funding to preserve open spaces, parks, farms, and historic areas, and to clean up polluted areas. The bill also guarantees that the funds don’t get diverted to pet projects or used to plug holes in the state budget. Last year, Governor Christie pocket vetoed a similar bill. It’s time for Governor Christie to do the right thing. Nearly two-thirds of New Jersey voters supported open space funding, and the full legislature has voted for it twice. We can convince Governor Christie to change his position, but we’ve got to flood him with messages so that he sees the overwhelming majority of New Jerseyans and their elected representatives support this law!

It is time that we start to ban lead bullets in this country! Many people may not think that lead bullets are a problem, but there's quite a bit of lead deposited into our ecosystems every year, and it's extremely detrimental to our future. My name is Brenden Whitelaw, and I've lived on my family farm for most of my life. There are a lot of things people don't like to recognize, one of which is how lead is destroying the ecosystems of many farming valleys. The main problem that I've recognized while growing up here is a rampant rodent population due to the extermination of natural predators like coyotes, and foxes, for the benefit of local cattle farmers. That's just the start of the chain of problems. The coyote's main food source are cottontails and hares, so when we kill off the coyotes, farmers have to fill their niche as predator. "What's the problem with that?" many people will ask. The problem is that we are not the best replacement. We use lead bullets to squelch the overpopulation of rabbits and hares and most farmers don't dispose of the carcasses left behind. What happens to these lead filled carcasses? For the most part they get scavenged by birds of prey. Many farmers in this valley think that they are doing the birds a service, by helping them get a meal, but they aren't. The lead is building up in their systems, and they are no longer creating viable offspring at a sustainable rate; egg shells are weaker, so the egg gets crushed, lead interferes with bodily functions leading to organ failure in birds of prey. Many of the same symptoms that occur in human lead poisoning are occurring in many avian species. It is our responsibility to help them. The chain of Destruction doesn't end there. With the birds of prey population dwindling, there has been a spike in a few completely different species that are even more destructive than the cottontails and hares to local farmers. The animals are the ground squirrel, known as the chisler where I'm from, Voles, and Gophers, they are the main food source for birds of prey. It is nearly impossible to keep them under control without the help of our flying friends. Most farmers I know shoot these rodents, trying to keep them under control, "with what?" you ask, more lead bullets! The the cycle repeats itself, only to leave more and more lead deposited across the valley, eventually leaching into the soil and causing more problems with soil fertility and plant viability. What can we do about the problem? Farmers aren't going to want the government to stop killing natural predators, so the least we can do is ban lead ammunition, and make non-lead ammunition more affordable and accessible. Please sign this petition and help save our flying friends, that includes the symbol of our great nation, the bald eagle!

A developer wants to build 160 homes on the pristine 117 acres of Oswit Canyon. This canyon offers magnificent hiking for Palm Springs residents and visitors. It is also home to wildlife such as birds, rabbits, bobcats, coyotes, big horn sheep and more! We must save it!

The town recycling hauler has been fined for having plastic bags in our our curbside bins and due to the lightweight nature of the bags they blow around when animals dig in trash. These windblown items become dangerous for wildlife and create mosquito breeding vectors along with other litter. Very few people return bags to store recycling bins. Big corporate petro chemical corporations are spending millions to defeat any bag bans and the current two bills on the Boston State house floor are likely to die in committee, like the expanded bottle bill which took 20 years before environmentalist presented to voters in a state wide ballot.

Volkswagen installed "defeat devices" on some 567,000 "clean" diesel cars in the U.S. to avoid emission control laws. These devices are elaborate software that turn on emission controls during testing, and turn them off during regular driving. As a result, these cars can emit as much as 40 times the legal limit of NOx, a major smog-forming pollutant. The Justice Department has been seen as the only agency that might hold executives personally accountable for this wrongdoing. While they have filed a civil suit to levy penalties against the company, they haven't pressed individual criminal charges yet -- so they need to hear from you.