May 2011 to April 12 ranked as the warmest 12-month stretch over the U.S. since records began in 1895 (NOAA NCDC) As far back as records go (1895), never has the U.S. strung together 12 straight months warmer than May 2011 to April 2012 according to new data released today by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) .

The record-setting 12-month period edged out November 1999-October 2000, the 2nd warmest 12-month period, by 0.1°F. The average temperature was 2.8 degrees F above the 20th century average.

In the last year, the U.S. has experienced its second hottest summer, fourth warmest winter (December through February) and warmest March on record. And NCDC announced April 2012 was third warmest on record.

Twenty-two states experienced their warmest May 2011-April 2012 (12-month) period, including Maryland, much of the Northeast and the Upper Midwest. Virginia and several other states had their second warmest May-April period on record.

Prayed by Rev. Tom Are, Jr. on Earth Day, April 22, 2012, at Village Presbyterian Church

Creator God and creating God and Lover of beauty:

Before the world ever was, how is it that you imagined color?

            Reds and greens and blues and yellows of infinite shades.

And before there were creatures, how is it that you imagined song?

            Of birds and whales and coyotes and children?

And how is it that you imagined, o God,

            rhythm pounded out by waves on the shore.

            You must love the rhythm of orbits and seasons,

of woodpeckers and heartbeats.

There nothing so beautiful to you, it seems, than the coming of spring when the earth rouses from sleep to burst forth in new life and energy renewed.

            There is nothing so beautiful to you, it seems, than the mystery of how

a warm sun and cool waters,

gentle breezes and seeds that split open and cell by new cell climb toward the stars— bearing fruit and food

all of which miraculously forms the mystery of earth and life and home.

            There is nothing so beautiful to you, it seems, than the creation that was pulled from nothingness by the sound of your voice, by the power of your word…. nothing so beautiful except even more beautiful to you are your children:

            the work of the sixth day.

            The work of creation fashioned in your image

            and shaped by love.

Surely you find your children most beautiful of all, when

            we live lives as compassionate stewards of all that belongs to you.

And even more beautiful are your children when they

            Choose generosity over greed,

            And compassion over fear,

            And forgiveness over revenge

            And care over apathy

            And joy over despair

            And love—love which is always a sampling of your own Spirit.

It seems there is nothing more beautiful to you than this.

So surely nothing grieves you so much as when that which is beautiful turns ugly.

            Does it confuse you, O God, when your creation, … the collection of color and song and breath and heartbeat… does it confuse you when your creation which you fashioned good, turns ugly;

            And waters fresh and clean are soured

            And air fresh and sweet, grows dark

            And food becomes less your garden and more our factory.

            Does it keep you awake at night? Are you up all night, unable to sleep because of the groaning?

Do you hear the weeping of your whole creation,

groaning under the stress of abuse and greed, and more greed, and unending greed?

Surely nothing grieves you more than the erosion of your good creation, save even more so than this, the callousness by which your children, the crown of creation, treat each other;

            Choosing fear rather than love

            Choosing selfishness rather than generosity

            Choosing to believe this moment matters more than tomorrow

            And our lives matter more than our children’s children

            And our comfort matters more than our calling.

Surely this is the ultimate source of your broken heart.

But this week is a new week of your creating,

And tomorrow a new day of your resurrecting,

            So this week, let there be generosity of gifts and of heart offered in the name of Jesus.

            And may there be acts of healing and restoration committed in the name of Jesus.

            And may there be bold works of new life claimed in the name of Jesus.

And may there be hope lived in the name of Jesus.

And may relationships withered and atrophied be breathed to life yet again, in the name of Jesus.

May we in every moment this week remember yet again that Jesus is alive,

            So hope reigns,

            And justice is coming,

            And love wins,

            And life will never surrender to the powers of death.

Surely nothing is more beautiful to you than this.

I am rising in opposition to HR 6018, resolution opposing UN Agenda 21. I do so not because I support Agenda 21 particularly, but because I believe that the issue is a false one, a strawman designed to limit our state’s ability to move more strongly into the sustainable economy, which we need to do for both economic and environmental reasons.

Agenda 21 is a non-binding agreement among 178 countries adapted at the Rio earth summit in 1992. The first paragraph of the preamble reads, and I quote:

1.1. Humanity stands at a defining moment in history. We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being. However, integration of environment and development concerns and greater attention to them will lead to the fulfillment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future. No nation can achieve this on its own; but together we can – in a global partnership for sustainable development.

There’s nothing in this paragraph with which I would disagree. What this says is that environmental impacts have to be a consideration as we make development decisions, and that we should develop in a way that limits the damage we do. This is what is meant by “sustainable.”

Yet somehow this 20-year-old, I repeat, non-binding agreement has become the object of intense opposition amongst a small percentage of rightwing activists. I am told that whenever a bikepath or a water management issue is on the agenda at a planning committee meeting in our state, these activists come to complain about Agenda 21, claiming that the UN is going to come to take away the keys to our cars or our rights to private property. This is, of course, patent nonsense. Just to be clear: the word “sustainable” does not mean, the decisions are made in Geneva. The decisions in Kansas, or elsewhere in the US, will be made right here in Kansas – it is a false issue, and unworthy of the time this body is putting into it.

But though the organized opposition to Agenda 21 is based on a baseless conspiracy theory, there are in fact real issues, and it’s worth reminding the committee of two of them. The first is that human activity is causing a buildup of carbon in earth’s atmosphere that already has and will continue to lead to changes in earth’s climate, including glacial melt, sea level rise, limited access to fresh water, agricultural impacts, disease vector shifts, and more. As a person of faith I would assert that covering our ears and denying these demonstrable facts is immoral, as it endangers people around the world who don’t have the the resources available to them to deal with the impacts that we are inflicting on them.

And the second fact of which I would remind the committee is that there are actions we can take to mitigate these impacts, including transitioning to cleaner, renewable sources of energy, lowering our reliance on fossil-fuel powered transportation, and in general being better and more responsible stewards of the earth which God has given us. It’s a happy fact that these activities are also providing vital jobs and economic activity throughout the state.

Though opposition to Agenda 21 is not much more than black helicopter stuff, as the overheated language of the resolution makes clear, there is a cost. Agenda 21 is being used as a convenient strawman to oppose all kinds of sensible, sustainable planning decisions on the state and local level. In Arizona it was used to force the false science of climate change denial into the schools. It is used to oppose investment in green energy, or for storm water management, or for bike paths, or public transportation, or for any development that will lead to us having a lighter impact on the earth. These matters, so sensible on their own, all of a sudden become sinister when they are linked with the bogeyman of Agenda 21.

In conclusion, the Agenda 21 would have been just another forgotten UN initiative if opposition to it weren’t being ginned up by those who have a philosophical or economic opposition to sustainable, renewable development. The opposition is really to taking any actions that would move us away from our profligate use of fossil fuels and toward a more sensible and – yes – sustainable way of life. Since I support the move toward sustainability, and since I don’t think Agenda 21 is any kind of real threat, I oppose the resolution before the committee today.

One of the watchwords that came out of this terrible experience for contemporary Jews is, Never again. Now, exactly what is meant by “never again” depends in large part on who is saying it: to some, it refers specifically to the Jewish people, and means that a powerful Israel will never again allow Jews around the world to be helpless victims of cruel regimes.

Others, though, take a more universal message from the phrase: never again will we allow an entire people to be destroyed by a more powerful group. This is the impetus behind Jewish communal involvement in the war in Bosnia some years ago, or recent activities on behalf of the people of Darfur, in the Sudan. When it comes to conflicts such as these, the most powerful term in the Jewish lexicon is genocide. If something is defined as a genocide, you can be sure that Jewish organizations large and small, local and national, will be in the lead in attempting to find solutions, and failing that, to protecting the people who have fallen victim to these conflicts.

It so happens that Yom Ha’Shoah often falls in close proximity to Earth Day, and this has led me to think about whether the term “never again” can be applied to the environmental challenges the world is facing. After all, we are in a period of rapid climatological changes, which are expected to have serious repercussions for people around the world. These will include the destruction of coastline communities due to rising sea levels; the loss of access to fresh water caused by the melting of glacial water sources; increased desertification and loss of agricultural capacity due to changing rainfall patters; what are called “disease vector shifts,” where diseases move into areas that are less accustomed to them and therefore less able to deal with them, and more. The US’ national security leadership is concerned about greater numbers of what are called climate refugees – masses of people who will need to move across countries and continents simply to find the resources they need to survive.

The thing is, you see, that we’re the ones causing all of this. You, and me, and everyone we know – by our profligate use of fossil fuels – coal for electricity, oil for transportation and everything else we use oil for, gas for heating. Plane travel. Industrial agriculture. Our modern lifestyle is already causing and will continue to cause increasing hardship for people all over the world, people who have neither the responsibility for the problem nor the resources to deal with it.

And for some reason, or for some number of reasons, we seem to have more or less decided not to do anything about it. We’d rather close our eyes and ears to the problem than take the steps that would address it, if those steps would inconvenience us.

The UN defines genocide as “the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.” Perhaps you’ll be relieved to know that’s I don’t think that’s what we’re doing. It’s not deliberate, and it’s not aimed at at any specific group of people. Is there such a thing as manslaughter, or of criminally negligent homicide – of whole populations? Because that, we are doing.

Perhaps the term “never again” isn’t the right one. After all, what we are seeing and will see in terms of climate change has not happened before in human history. But the idea behind never again – the idea that the lesson of the Holocaust is that it is our human responsibility to protect the weak and powerless, that if they are destroyed it is our collective human responsibility – that surely applies.

Let’s hope that in years to come we are not lighting candles and singing somber songs and saying kaddish for the earth and its peoples that we ourselves have helped to destroy. Let’s instead begin to take the actions that can stop this process for happening. Let’s not have to say never again, again.

 Spring is coming – We’re beginning to move past the partisan gridlock of the past couple of years and toward acknowledging and dealing with some our most pressing issues.

The increased number of extreme weather events, the fact that we really didn’t have a winter this year, has really made folks realize that there’s an issue here we have to deal with.

The boom in wind energy in Kansas has shown some of our political leaders how much potential there is in renewable energy – for good jobs and economic activity.

And there’s nothing that brings out the hope like a couple of victories! The Keystone XL pipeline was rejected after an intense effort. The Holcomb coal plant has been put on indefinite hold by a federal court. The EPA established new mercury regulations that protect the health of our children. And Kansas IPL was involved in all of these efforts.

A year of action – Through a grant by the Mid-America Regional Council to do energy efficiency upgrades, we will have a real, tangible, measurable impact on 15 houses of worship in Northeast Kansas.

Through our association with Ecumenical Campus Ministries at KU, we will be showing the film Dirty Business: “Clean Coal” and the Battle for Our Energy Future, around the state this year.

And we have increased outreach to our state elected officials in support of legislation that will promote and expand the clean energy economy.

Now I am asking you to join with us in this important work by becoming an individual or family member of Kansas Interfaith Power & Light. Your contribution of $35 for an individual or $60 for a family joins you into a collective voice that allows us to reach even more communities and to be an even more effective faith voice for energy efficiency and for the use of renewable energy. Your donation will be matched dollar-for-dollar by a grant from our parent organization, The Regeneration Project.

To make your tax-deductible contribution to Kansas IPL, please click here. Please join with us in the critical work of Kansas IPL, so we can ensure that Kansas moves boldly and surely toward our clean energy future.

 Yours in faith,

Rabbi Moti Rieber
Director

Kansas IPL is administering a grant program to help fund energy efficiency upgrades for 15 houses of worship in Leavenworth, Wyandotte, Johnson and Miami counties. Qualifying applicants will receive an energy efficiency audit and a $3,000 matching grant for upgrades to lighting, thermostats, and more!

Participating communities will save 15-25% of their energy costs!

Please review the “Matching Grant Information” document below. If you wish to apply, fill out both the “Matching Grant Application” and the “Leadership Support Letter” and submit them by email. If you have any questions, please contact us at (913) 232-2336, or rebmoti<@>kansasipl.org.

Matching Grant Info

Matching Grant Application

Leadership support letter

To read original article click here.

“The Clean Air Act is designed to protect people’s health from emissions of harmful pollutants,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator of EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Today’s settlement will protect residents living near the facility and ensure that the necessary pollution controls are installed to protect the residents of southeastern Kansas in the future.”

“This settlement puts CRRM on a level playing field with the more than 100 petroleum refineries that have agreed to implement aggressive pollution control measures, thereby reducing the threats posed by harmful emissions to area residents,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, assistant attorney general for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice. “The agreement reaffirms our commitment to ensure that the petroleum refining industry complies with the nation’s Clean Air Act.”

The settlement resolves alleged violations of the Clean Air Act (CAA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). Coffeyville allegedly made modifications to its refinery that increased emissions without first obtaining pre-construction permits and installing required pollution control equipment. The CAA requires major sources of air pollution to obtain such permits before making changes that would result in a significant emissions increase of any pollutant. The settlement also resolves violations in which CRRM failed to timely notify state and local emergency responders of releases of hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide from the refinery, as required by the CERCLA and EPCRA.

Once fully implemented, the pollution controls required by the settlement will annually reduce an estimated 200 tons of NOx emissions and more than 110 tons of SO₂ emissions. The settlement will also reduce emissions of volatile organic compounds, particulate matter, carbon monoxide and other pollutants that affect air quality. CRRM has also agreed to perform a voluntary environmental project at the refinery valued at more than $1.2 million. The project will benefit the environment and surrounding communities by reducing emissions of volatile organic compounds and hydrogen sulfide, reducing the frequency of future acid gas flaring incidents, and conserve 15 million gallons of water each year that would previously have come from the Verdigris River.

The settlement with CRRM is the 30th under an EPA initiative to improve compliance among petroleum refiners and to reduce significant amounts of air pollution from refineries nationwide through comprehensive, company-wide settlements. The first of EPA’s settlements was reached in 2000, and with today’s settlement, 107 refineries operating in 32 states and territories – more than 90 percent of the total refining capacity in the United States – are under judicially enforceable agreements to significantly reduce emissions of pollutants. As a result of the settlement agreements, refiners have agreed to invest more than $6 billion in new pollution controls designed to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and other pollutants by more than 360,000 tons per year.

CRRM’s refinery has the capacity to refine more than 115,000 barrels of crude oil per day, producing gasoline, diesel fuels, and propane.

The State of Kansas has joined in the settlement and will receive a portion of the civil penalty.

The consent decree, lodged in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas, is subject to a 30-day public comment period and court approval.

More information on the CRRM settlement:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/coffeyville.html

More information on other petroleum refinery settlements:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/cases/civil/caa/oil/index.html

via EPA press release

I am submitting testimony in opposition to the amended version of HB 2446. We support the energy storage provisions of the bill but oppose the amendment freezing the Renewable Portfolio Standards pending construction of the Holcomb II coal-fired power plant.

The Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) instituted in May 2009 has proven to be a highly successful initiative in the area of clean energy. Since it was instituted, Siemens built a construction plant in Hutchinson, in large part due to the fact that Kansas had shown a commitment to renewable energy by adapting the RPS. Kansas has also undergone a boom in its wind energy resources – this year we are second in the nation in new wind construction. In other words, the RPS has meant jobs and economic activity throughout the state – in fact, this sector was one of the state’s few bright spots during the recent period of economic downturn.

The graduation of the RPS as currently legislated is the very definition of “regulatory certainty.” Businesses have been able to plan their initiatives using the legislated 10-year timeframe. Changing this now would add a counterproductive element of uncertainty to the burgeoning renewable energy industry in our state.

In addition to the economic considerations, there also are significant environmental reasons to leave the RPS alone. Increasing the percentage of renewables in our portfolio lowers our reliance on fossil fuels, especially coal. This is particularly relevant here as the legislation in question here ties the RPS to construction of a coal plant.

Coal is the single most polluting way to create electricity that we have. It releases air pollution, particularly small particulate matter, mercury, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides, which are responsible for over 60,000 premature deaths each year nationwide, as well as thousands more cases of asthma and cancer.

Mercury in particular is a significant health danger to the unborn, babies and nursing mothers. That’s why people of faith all over the country support safeguards on mercury from coal plants. As Alexei Laushkin of the Evangelical Environmental Network said in an interview last month, “We believe protecting the unborn from mercury poisoning is a consistent pro-life position.”

We can contrast all of this with the clean energy production portfolio of wind and solar, geothermal and small scale hydro, biomass and all the other many forms of energy generation that fall under the umbrella of the RPS. These are responsible for little pollution, and no carbon emissions. We don’t purchase the wind from out of state like we do coal. It truly is a homegrown energy resource.

In addition, we’ve have known since the 1990s that the developed world will have to decrease its production of carbon dioxide in order to prevent the worst of the repercussions of carbon pollution in the atmosphere, including (in Kansas): increases in extreme weather, increased vulnerability to disease, changes in agricultural patterns, difficulty in fresh water access, and more. One of the best and most certain ways we have available to do this is by decreasing our reliance on fossil-fuel-based power generation and moving strongly into the use of renewables – especially wind, solar, biofuels, geothermal and other power sources that fall under the RPS. Backing away from the RPS would mean backing away from the one of the most effective strategies we have to deal with this important issue.

The coal plant in Holcomb is tied up in both federal and state litigation, and neither court is likely to be influenced by the actions of the legislature. The federal court in particular is requiring the kind of thorough environmental impact statement which should have been done in the first place. There is also the question of whether the EPA would allow construction to go forward under its increased levels of oversight. Also, the low price of natural gas has changed the economics around coal-fired energy generation. The present legislation will not affect any of that.

I want to put on record that to the best of my knowledge, none of the environmental organizations working on the Holcomb II issue in 2008 and 2009 were included in the talks that led to the legislative compromise. It was a closed discussion between Gov. Parkinson and Sunflower, and the environmental organizations found out about it when it was announced to the public. That’s why we opposed the compromise in the legislature at the time.

The RPS has been a very good starting point for Kansas’ move to clean energy, and it has had significant positive economic and environmental effects for our state. Our goal is to build on this accomplishment, to expand the RPS requirements, and to redouble Kansas’ efforts in efficiency and clean energy.

In conclusion, the RPS is an economic engine that helps generate jobs throughout our state, and which has had and will continue to have significant environmental benefits for Kansans. The legislation before the committee today ties this productive policy to an unnecessary, wasteful and polluting coal-plant project, one that is not needed and that is tied up in regulatory and judicial uncertainty. This is simply bad policy, which is why we oppose HB 2446 as amended.

Food connects us to some of the most important questions of our time. The food choices we make — individually and as a society — affect not only our health, but the health of the planet and all of Creation. Our food system is also one of the leading contributors of greenhouse pollution causing climate change.

About one-fifth of climate change pollution comes from the food industry. That’s more than from all transportation combined.  The health and environmental costs of the industrial agriculture system is more and more becoming an area of concern and action for faith communities throughout the state and the nation.

The Cool Harvest program educates faith communities about this issue and facilitates dialogue and action.

This program is centered around a viewing of the film, “Nourish,” about the impact of our industrial agriculture system on our health and the health of the planet, followed by a facilitated discussion of the issues raised by the film.

This program will be facilitated by Rabbi Moti Rieber, Coordinator of Kansas IPL, and is open to the public.