With more than 200 sunny days a year, Idaho is enjoying a boom in solar energy development. This is great news, since solar is quicker, cleaner, and cheaper than building another dam or dirty coal-fired plant. Idaho Power Company is currently experiencing record profits at the expense of its ratepayers' environmental and public health. To maintain its antiquated business model, the company is trying to prevent clean energy development by limiting 20-year contracts to two years. Anything less than a long-term contract makes it nearly impossible for renewable energy businesses to secure financing. Investing in clean energy benefits Idaho's economy, protects Idaho's air and water, limits carbon emissions, and preserves a clean future. For more information, please visit the following link: http://snakeriveralliance.org/storm-clouds-over-solar-were-working-to-help-make-sure-idahos-young-solar-industry-will-survive/#more-5195

Right now, we’re at a critical moment in the fight to save bees -- and we need your help! In just a few weeks, the Obama administration will likely announce a plan to protect bees. This is our best chance for nationwide action to protect these crucial pollinators -- and our food system that depends on them. But in order to truly help bees, the plan must address toxic pesticides made by chemical companies like Bayer and Syngenta. Almost 4 million Americans have already signed petitions urging President Obama to protect bees from these pesticides. But we need you to keep up the pressure on him to put the bees and our food system ahead of Big Ag’s profits. Sign the petition now! Urge President Obama to ban bee-killing pesticides!

The USDA approved Monsanto’s new genetically engineered cotton and soybeans that are resistant to dicamba, an herbicide that has been known to cause reproductive and developmental harm. Herbicides like this are poisoning our soil and water and pose a threat to the health of our families, environment, and wildlife. We need less toxic herbicides and pesticides in our food system, not more. But now that these herbicide-resistant seeds have been approved, more toxic chemicals on the food we eat every day could be imminent. We need to push back and tell the USDA that their approval of these seeds is unacceptable.

The USDA approved Monsanto’s new genetically engineered cotton and soybeans that are resistant to dicamba, an herbicide that has been known to cause reproductive and developmental harm. Herbicides like this are poisoning our soil and water and pose a threat to the health of our families, environment, and wildlife. We need less toxic herbicides and pesticides in our food system, not more. But now that these herbicide-resistant seeds have been approved, more toxic chemicals on the food we eat every day could be imminent. We need to push back and tell the USDA that their approval of these seeds is unacceptable.

The USDA approved Monsanto’s new genetically engineered cotton and soybeans that are resistant to dicamba, an herbicide that has been known to cause reproductive and developmental harm. Herbicides like this are poisoning our soil and water and pose a threat to the health of our families, environment, and wildlife. We need less toxic herbicides and pesticides in our food system, not more. But now that these herbicide-resistant seeds have been approved, more toxic chemicals on the food we eat every day could be imminent. We need to push back and tell the USDA that their approval of these seeds is unacceptable.

For 8 years, the community has demanded the removal of this disaster. After spending 3 million dollars over three years, only 60,000 tires were removed! Now the latest proposal is to spend 2 million dollars over two years to remove 100,000 tires, leaving 600,000 tires with their tie straps deteriorating. This is unacceptable! The local salvage community believes with use of proper equipment, a tub grinder, all of these tires could be removed at the same cost in the same time frame. Enough is enough. Time is of the essence: Stop this disaster before it becomes a major marine environmental disaster. Sign this petition demanding more for your dollar. Efficiency is the key to this project. Save our Oceans.

OC Parks and the Irvine Ranch Conservancy use hundreds of thousands of your tax dollars to purchase toxic herbicides, which are regularly applied to wild and manicured landscapes. Roundup, Aquamaster and Transline are made by Monsanto and Dow Chemical for "weed control." Their active ingredients are glyphosate and clopyralid, which are known to disrupt the biology of our environment by causing health problems in humans and wildlife. There is a wide variety of environmentally-friendly alternatives for landscape management. Please urge OC Parks Director Stacy Blackwood and Irvine Ranch Conservancy Executive Director Mike O'Connell to stop using these harmful petrochemicals and utilize environmentally friendly alternatives. The health of future generations is at stake. Thank you!

1. SB 44 calls for a reduction in clean energy source power generation by 50 percent for large utilities and 25 percent for rural cooperatives . 2. 76 percent of Coloradans indicate that they are more likely to support candidates who promote the use of clean energy sources. The same survey found that 59 percent are less likely to vote for a candidate who votes to stop taxpayer support of wind and solar energy production. 3. According to the Pew Charitable Trust, when Ohio passes a similar law, it lost millions of dollars in investments, which led to the loss of thousands of clean energy jobs. 4. According to the Beacon Hill Institute, SB 44 would cost consumers approximately $8.6 billion between 2016 and 2025 due to the use of less efficient energy generation sources.

PennEast commissioned Drexel University to co-author an economic impact analysis of its proposed pipeline. Not one economic downside was taken into consideration in the report. Instead, the analysts provided only wildly exaggerated job creation numbers and vastly overstated economic benefits to Pennsylvania and New Jersey. When questioned by the press, PennEast refused to disclose the amount they paid for the analysis. Suffice it to say, however, that they got the best economic impact analysis money can buy. Deliberate attempts to mislead the public may be how PennEast does business, but should not be the way a university does.

CURRENT UPDATE (2/23/2015 7 PM): Per Mayor Tom Theodores: We have put a total stop to the spraying indefinitely. I will meet with staff tomorrow to get fully briefed on the issue and the options; we will then decide when and how to proceed with getting input from the public and bringing it to council. I will let you know what and when the process will be. Rest assured that no spraying will take place without the review of the city council with the opportunity for public input. *** Sausalito's Martin Luther King Park is scheduled to be sprayed with herbicides Roundup and Surflan on Tuesday, February 24. This multi-use lawn is frequented by children and dogs and both substances have been found to have serious adverse effects on health and the environment. Glyphosate, the active ingredient of Roundup, has been linked to cancers, reproductive harm, genetic damage, thyroid disorders, respiratory illnesses and other ailments. There is also active concern about a specific inert ingredient, polyethoxylated tallowamine (POEA), which may cause more cellular damage than even glyphosate. Oryzalin, the active ingredient of Surflan, is linked to reproductive harm, central nervous system depression and is a possible human carcinogen according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Both substances are at least moderately mobile in soil and have the potential to contaminate connected or nearby water sources. Articles in Scientific American and Reuters noting the dangers of Roundup: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weed-whacking-herbicide-p/ http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/25/roundup-health-study-idUSL2N0DC22F20130425 UPDATE 2/23/2015 (4:50 PM): Thank you to everyone for spreading the word! The spraying has been delayed for the time being. Here is the response from the mayor and my response to him. I will update with any details on a public hearing, and please continue to spread the word in opposing the use of Roundup in our public spaces. From the mayor: Tanya, Thanks for your concern. We are not spraying tomorrow and will delay spraying until staff has had a chance to brief council and assure us that spraying will be safe. Tom My response: Thank you for your response. Can you confirm a time and date on the public hearing of this matter? My ongoing concern is that we will get the same canned response from the Department of Public Works that justifies the use of Roundup while disregarding the strong research and ongoing findings proving the health and environmental risks of these herbicides. There have been great alternative suggestions from the public including a volunteer gardening task force or use of a safe and effective herbicide such as Scythe. We are currently up to 122 signatures on the petition. It goes without saying that nobody on that petition thinks any amount of Roundup is safe or acceptable to use and will be content with simply a delayed use of Roundup. Tanya

Over 75% of monarch butterflies essential to pollinate our food supply have disappeared, along with the milkweed they need for their own survival, due to the widespread use of toxic agricultural chemicals. Nobody seems to have put forward the idea that state highway departments, at little extra cost, could plant milkweed instead of grasses, providing the little beasties with nourishment along their entire incredible migration route. It's not rocket science, folks. --- I am a member of the Conservation Commission for the City of East Providence, Rhode Island and we are looking into doing just that on some public properties along our waterfront, and I am sure that in addition to state highways there are many cities, towns, and counties that could replace weeds and grasses on a variety of public properties with milkweed and an admixture of native plants

The fossil fuel industry's campaign to promote climate denial, led by the Koch brothers, has corrupted Harvard University and the Smithsonian, two of the most trusted scientific institutions in the world. The Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, a joint program of the Smithsonian Institution and Harvard University, is harboring a polluter-funded climate denier. Documents uncovered by Greenpeace reveal that Dr. Wei-Hock "Willie" Soon has taken money from the Kochs, Exxon Mobil, coal giant Southern Company, and others to produce "deliverables" that push the long-debunked claim that solar activity, not fossil fuel pollution, drives global warming. The New York Times reports: "He has accepted more than $1.2 million in money from the fossil-fuel industry over the last decade while failing to disclose that conflict of interest in most of his scientific papers. At least 11 papers he has published since 2008 omitted such a disclosure, and in at least eight of those cases, he appears to have violated ethical guidelines of the journals that published his work." Coal giant Southern Company was one of Soon's biggest funders: "The newly disclosed documents, plus additional documents compiled by Greenpeace over the last four years, show that at least $409,000 of Dr. Soon’s funding in the past decade came from Southern Company Services, a subsidiary of the Southern Company, based in Atlanta. Southern is one of the largest utility holding companies in the country, with huge investments in coal-burning power plants." Smithsonian-Harvard's contract with Southern Company forbade disclosure of Willie Soon's funding, a clear violation of scientific integrity and ethics. The Guardian reports: "ExxonMobil gave $335,000 but stopped funding Soon in 2010, according to the documents. The astrophysicist reportedly received $274,000 from the main oil lobby, the American Petroleum Institute, and $230,000 from the Charles G Koch Foundation. He received an additional $324,000 in anonymous donations through a trust used by the Kochs and other conservative donors, the documents showed." Some of the Exxon Mobil money was used to directly fund Harvard-Smithsonian general expenses. Harvard-Smithsonian has no funding-disclosure requirements, nor does it have a conflict-of-interest policy that prevents funding from fossil-fuel companies of climate science research. Is Harvard-Smithsonian a scientific institution or a fossil-fuel climate-denial public-relations firm? To restore public trust in the institution, Harvard-Smithsonian director Charles Alcock must: 1) sever his institution's ties with Dr. Wei-Hock Soon 2) end all financial relationships with the fossil fuel industry 3) establish strong financial public disclosure rules for all institute scientists that prevent anonymous or secret funding of research Harvard University and the Smithsonian Institution are two of the most prominent and trusted scientific institutions in the world. They are taking money from Koch and Exxon to promote climate denial. This must end today. Sources: "Deeper Ties to Corporate Cash for Doubtful Climate Researcher," The New York Times, February 21, 2015 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/22/us/ties-to-corporate-cash-for-climate-change-researcher-Wei-Hock-Soon.html "Work of prominent climate change denier was funded by energy industry", The Guardian, February 21, 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/21/climate-change-denier-willie-soon-funded-energy-industry "Documents Reveal Fossil Fuel Fingerprints on Contrarian Climate Research", Inside Climate News, February 21, 2015 http://insideclimatenews.org/news/21022015/documents-reveal-fossil-fuel-fingerprints-contrarian-climate-research-willie-soon-harvard-smithsonian-koch-exxon-southern-company