crossposted at five before chaos.

Julie’s excellent post on upcoming bad energy policies really piqued my interest this morning so I dug in and did some research in the hopes of giving you even more information regrading these horrible proposals. It’s a bit extensive, but this is important stuff, folks.

First off, there’s a proposal to increase subsidies for coal liquification. Yes, you heard right, one of the dirtiest fuel sources on earth. There’s an extensive post over at MyDD that details the many ways that this is a bad, bad idea. Increased emissions, according to the EPA. More moutaintops destroyed and rivers clogged (have you seen how this has devastated West Virginia?), as well as the devastating poverty and health problems that are part and parcel of working in the coal industry.

Now here’s the clinker – there are quite a few Democrats sponsoring both the Senate and House versions of these bills. And lo and behold, one of the sponsors of these bills is none other than Sen. Brack Obama, who apparently can do no wrong to his starry-eyed supporters. Well, there’s something for you, then. This bill is bad news.

As far as I can tell, none of the VT delegation has signed on to this, but we need to let them know it’s bad, nevertheless. After you read up on it, you Vermonters should all call Congressman Welch at 888-605-7270 and let him know your opposition to  H.R.370 — the title: To promote coal-to-liquid fuel activities, and call Sen. Sanders at 802-862-0697 and Sen. Leahy at 802-863-2525 and voice your opposition to S.154 — the title: A bill to promote coal-to-liquid fuel activities. If you’re from another state, you can call the Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121 and they should be able to direct you to your delegation if you’re not sure who they are. We need to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels. Now. Not later.

But the madness continues so unabated, you’d almost think the Repubs were still in charge. There’s another bill Julie pointed out that tries to pass itself off as being a progressive energy policy, but in reality is anything but. As the Rutland Herald is reporting:

A dozen states, including Vermont and Massachusetts, would be blocked from imposing new requirements on automakers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under a draft energy bill being prepared for a vote later this month.

The “discussion draft” would prohibit the head of the Environmental Protection Agency from issuing a waiver needed for a state to impose auto pollution standards if the new requirements are “designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” …
It calls for expansion of the production of ethanol and other alternative motor fuels – including liquefied coal – to 35 billion gallons a year by 2025…

“The intent is to tie EPA’s hands when it comes to establishing greenhouse gas standards,” said Frank O’Donnell of Clean Air Watch, an environmental advocacy group.

Apparently liquefied coal is all the rage now. There’s the whole joke known as ethanol (which I’ll get to in a minute). And it does indeed try to tie the hands of states such as Vermont and California, who are trying to impose higher mileage requirements on its automobiles. Oh, and did I mention that the chairman of that committee is John Dingell, of Michigan? You know, home of the perpetually sputtering U.S. automotive industry that still behaves like it’s 1972?

This one’s not an actual bill yet, it just consists of a discussion draft memorandum (full memo here) that will, if it goes through, be incorporated into some larger energy proposal in the next session.

Now let’s talk about ethanol, a gasoline substitute that is a type of alcohol that in the United States, comes primarily from corn. You hear Bush talk about it a lot, so that alone should give you pause. But you also hear a lot of other politicians talk about ethanol. Why? Because the government subsidizes the hell out of it, that’s why. Now, I don’t agree with a lot that comes out of the libertarian Cato Institute, especially in regards to the fabled “free market”, but consider this:

Ethanol is a corn-based gasoline substitute. Gasoline is a creation of the marketplace, but ethanol is a creation of Washington, D.C. The ethanol program originated in the late 1970s during the energy crisis. A quarter-century later, there is no energy crisis and virtually every independent assessment –by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the General Accounting Office, the Congressional Budget Office, NBC News and several academic journals — has concluded that ethanol subsidies have been a costly boondoggle with almost no public benefit.

Yet even after ethanol has siphoned $7 billion from the federal treasury, the mighty ethanol subsidies still flow. Why? Ethanol’s survival has nothing to do with economics or the environment and everything to do with political muscle. Almost 70 percent of ethanol is produced by America’s premier agri-giant, Archer Daniels Midland. ADM, the self-proclaimed “supermarket to the world,” has spent a small fortune on farming Capitol Hill over the past 20 years. Through programs like ethanol and sugar price supports, it has reaped a profitable harvest from taxpayers. In fact, an estimated 40 percent of ADM’s profits come from government-subsidized products…

On the alleged environmental benefits from ethanol, the GAO says, “Available evidence suggests that the ethanol program has little effect on the environment.” Getting rid of ethanol subsidies would “slightly increase carbon monoxide emissions… but slightly reduce emissions of ozone precursors.”

On reducing alleged global warming, the GAO says that the “change in greenhouse gas emissions that would occur if ethanol fuel were not subsidized is likely to be minimal.”

On reducing petroleum imports, the GAO concludes, “Ethanol tax incentives have not significantly enhanced U.S. energy security.” Ethanol reduces U.S. gasoline consumption by “less than one percent.”

Now, be aware that the Cato author is an old righty Club-for-Growther, but the facts that he presents are easily verifiable elsewhere. Is this ridiculous, or what? And by making it from corn, it uses more energy to produce ethanol than the energy it provides. It’s made much more efficiently and cheaply elsewhere, but we don’t import it, thanks to a 54 cent per gallon tarriff (that ADM successfully lobbied for heavily about ten years ago). Have a gander at this “Ethanol Primer” from Taxpayers for Common Sense (and no, it’s not a front group). You can see how mad this really is. And when ethanol subsidies increase, the price of food goes up, because there is less corn for food sources.

So, if you’d made it this far, my point is the problem isn’t just “Big Oil”. They’re definitely a big part of the problem, but the bigger picture is twofold. Both parties are continuing to drink from the corporate trough at the expense of the public interest. And more importantly, as a nation, many of us are still stuck in an early-20th century mindset in regards to energy production and consumption. We need to use less, and we need to get it from renewable and efficient sources. There’s no way around that fact.

(I’m bumping a retread from WAY back up to the top, because in light of recent news that Bush is planning on relaxing environmental guidelines around National Parks, as well as his recent comparing of Obama to a nazi appeaser before the Knesset, I think its starting to have relevance… – promoted by odum)

As the clock ticks on towards the end of the Bush Presidency, I can’t help but feel a nagging dread at the prospect of what mischief this President could cause in his final weeks.

Presidents pull some interesting things out of their hats on the way out the door – whether its because of the freedom from professional accountability, or simply a last chance to pay back campaign supporters. Pardons are what we usually expect to see. Clinton, of course, caught hell for pardoning Marc Rich and others. More colorfully, Reagan expunged George Steinbrenner’s record from his 1974 guilty plea on obstruction of justice and conspiring to make illegal contributions to President Nixon. Then, of course, there was Bush I’s Christmas Eve pardons of Iran-Contra figures which came only days before former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger was to stand trial for perjury.

Clinton also garnered the ire of the right for last minute administrative fiats. Signing the treaty creating the International Criminal Court, the protection of vast swaths of environmentally sensitive or unique land, and a tightening of logging regulations made the GOP seethe.

If Bush is thinking similarly, the last weks between the 08 election and the swearing in of a (hopefully) Democratic President could be scary. On the one hand, he has governed as President ‘Id’, so perhaps he has nothing up his sleeve – as he wears everything on it. If not, well – the mind boggles.

The President’s administrative authority gives him the broad powers of implementation. From this perspective, the easiest targets will again be environmental. He has already quietly attempted to sneak in rules for the maintenence of National Forests that would be devastating, and has opened up National Parks to unprecedented exploitation. In (those particular anti-environmental efforts from a year back), his style did suggest an uncharacteristic degree of concern about the public’s perceptions. Without that concern holding him back, he could throw the barn doors wide open.

Additionally, it’s not hard to imagine draconian new rules around federal programs designed to squeeze out immigrants in need, or to simply choke off programs’ effectiveness and ability to be broadly implemented – especially where they may compete with church-based programs.

And it’s hard not to worry about the prospects for higher-profile mischief, too. Given that the President’s simplistic political zealotry knows no bounds, its not hard to imagine a last minute “10 Commandments” monument dropped on the White House lawn, or a January attempt to take out Iranian nuclear sites.

At this early point speculating is little more than nervous musing, but as the final days get closer (and in the face of a Supreme Court that is giving tremendous deference to Presidential power), the nervousness will loom larger.

(Meke sure you view this complete diary, as the the way the bill impacts Vermont specifically is detailed after the jump – promoted by odum)

There’s a great diary over at MyDD which outlines some serious problems with an energy bill which is cosponsored by Barak Obama.  The first is a bill to support liquid coal.  From the diary:

We don’t know how to sequester mass quantities of carbon dioxide created during coal liquefaction yet. Even once we figure that process out–a solution that will no doubt reduce the net energy output of the coal to fuel process itself–we’ve still got a dirty fuel that increases greenhouse emissions compared to petroleum.

There’s also a draft bill up for discussion that includes a provision which will screw us, as Vermonters, over, along with a lot of other states.  Per The Rutland Herald:

A dozen states, including Vermont and Massachusetts, would be blocked from imposing new requirements on automakers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under a draft energy bill being prepared for a vote later this month.

The “discussion draft” would prohibit the head of the Environmental Protection Agency from issuing a waiver needed for a state to impose auto pollution standards if the new requirements are “designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

This is bad.  The first bill has quite a few Democratic sponsors and presents a serious danger.  The second is only in draft form, so it’s got a much better chance of being modified before it makes it into being an actual bill, but they’re both representative of how much work we have to do to deal with the existing archaic mentality when it comes to proper energy usage.

(It’s about time something other than my T-day post got up here, and this one’s nicely written. – promoted by JulieWaters)

The Sun

Former Sen. John Edwards, left, Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama during the Democratic presidential primary debate in Manchester, N.H., June 3, 2007.

I sort of watched last night’s debate, when the bloviation reached the painfully embarrassing level I would switch channels in favor of a program about the physics of the Sun, about which it may not be possible to bloviate.

Switching back and forth between those two particular shows created a kind of auditory strobe effect, in one moment the undeniable reality of the physical processes taking place on the Sun, in the next the equally undeniable bullshit taking place in a suburb of our solar system known as New Hampshire.

One self serving statement followed another, charges of timidity and lack of leadership leveled by Edwards against Clinton and Obama, charges of being 41/2 years late with leadership leveled against Edwards by Obama.

I had just returned from the Sun when those barbs were hurled and it struck me that it was possible that no one on the stage possessed the ability to lead a rifle squad down the street to buy a newspaper.

They all had their moments I suppose but during one orbit I heard Clinton say:

“The differences among us are minor, the differences between us and the Republicans are major. And I don’t want anybody in America to be confused.”

From “Democrats Focus on Iraq In Contentious Second Debate” by  Anne Kornblut and Dan Balz at The Washington Post

That was a bit of truth because, although I might have to hold my nose to vote for her and others on the stage last night, I am not capable of the kind of confusion that would lead me to vote Republican.

In her truthiness however, Ms Clinton neglected to mention the incredible similarities between the Democrats and the Republicans in their insatiable eagerness to sell out to the highest corporate bidder.

Iraq and health care seemed to take up most of the debate and I don’t remember hearing a word about campaign and ethics reform, no mention of the lizards of K Street and their influence in preventing the delivery of Health care and prescription drugs as well as their influence in going to war and prolonging it.
To be fair though, it may have come up while I was eight light minutes away.

Another bit of truth that I caught as I whizzed by on one orbit was Edwards declaring Bush’s global war on terror to be nothing but a bumper sticker slogan:

“That’s all it is, all it’s ever been — was intended to do was for George Bush to use it to justify everything he does: the ongoing war in Iraq, Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, spying on Americans, torture,” Edwards said. “None of those things are okay. They are not the United States of America.”

From “Democrats Focus on Iraq In Contentious Second Debate” by Anne Kornblut and Dan Balz at The Washington Post

Now that is something that I have been saying for years, so it must be true.

Reports that I read this morning have Obama as “commanding and confidant” whatever that means and five of the candidates are left almost unmentioned, mere also-rans playing the role of a “Greek chorus:

“Reduced to the status of a Greek chorus, the five Democratic also-rans had a difficult time breaking through the clutter. Joe Biden did have a strong moment when he challenged the growing panic over the threat of Iran producing nuclear weapons. The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said bluntly, “Understand how weak Iran is. They are not a year away or two years away. They are a decade away from being able to … put a nuclear weapon on top of a missile that can strike. They are far away from that.” But Biden also blustered in the same answer when he said defiantly, “At the end of the day, if they posed a missile, stuck it on a pad, I’d take it out.”

From “In New Hampshire, the Democrats play a little rougher” by Walter Shapiro at Salon

I don’t know who won, and I suppose I could surf from one blog to another, or one candidate’s web site to another all day and read arguments why each supposedly prevailed, but I think I’ll resist the urge.

At the end I gave a split decision to Edwards because he said that he was wrong to have voted to authorize the war. Maybe if he and the rest who voted for this insanity start writing notes of condolence to all who have suffered the pain and death of this war they can finish before the Sun cools and dies.

Did you know that photons emitted in fusion reactions at the center of the Sun can take hundreds of thousands of years to reach the surface and then travel to earth in just a few minutes?

I learned that during last night’s debate as well as learning the fact that the only thing in our solar system that may outlast the Sun will be this interminable campaign.

Bob Higgins
Worldwide Sawdust

Cross-Posted at Rip and Read

NOTE: Normally, I wouldn’t endulge in shameless self-promotion here at GMD– after all, that is what one’s OWN blog is for.  But, I am cross-posting this piece because I am dismayed about all the Inhuman Spawn of Satan feelings I see zipping around and my hope is that we can start throwing more spitballs at our opponants than at our allies.

The NEW New Nixon

They may have called Bill Clinton the “Come Back Kid”, but perhaps the American Politician who reinvented himself most successfully, time and time again, was Richard Nixon. In each new permutation, we were told that this was “The New Nixon”.

Well, this twisted and fascinating man is gone now…and, wherever he is, it must really irk him that he can’t make just one more comeback.

At least he couldn’t…until now!

And it’s all thanks to Philip Baruth over at Vermont Daily Briefing.

Thanks to Philip’s wizardry at the typewriter, Nixon has found his way back into the arena in the latest episode of Audio Dream Theater’s League of Extraordinary Republican Gentlemen.

Episode 3: Statehouse of the Living Dead features the voice-work of:

• Philip Baruth  as the Narrator and Brian Dubie, Wonder Boy.
• Neil Jensen (Publisher of What’s the Point and Green Mountain Daily’s own front pager Vermonter) in a masterful turn as Al Gore, and also a surprise cameo as Henry Kissinger.
• With Special Guest Star Kathryn Blume. Blume is one of the actresses who lead a world wide protest against the war in Iraq by helping to inspire 1,029 performances of Aristophanes’s anti-war farce, Lysistrata, around the globe.

It probably goes without saying that I feel very lucky to be a part of this little acting company…but I’ll say it anyway, because I am.

I hope you enjoy Statehouse of the Living Dead! at least half as much as I enjoyed working on it!

(Promoted, because positive, uplifting things are few and far between around here of late. – promoted by odum)

Per Daily Kos, a speech Hodes gave yesterday:

To be a Democrat in this modern age means to inherit a fearful nation and give it new confidence and new strength.  It means creating policies that transform our nation into something stronger and more compassionate than it was before. Our great opportunity is to build on the legacy of the Democratic Party, adapt it to modern times and lead with strength and clarity. To paraphrase John Fitzgerald Kennedy, we look forward and not behind. We welcome new ideas without rigid reaction. We care about people, their health, their housing, their jobs, their schools, their civil rights, and their civil liberties.  And we believe that we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad.

More below the fold…

It would be easy to leave this work to the presidential candidates.  But I believe that we must define this new vision.  The challenges we face are both global and local, but they are all interrelated. How can we address immigration without addressing our trade policies?  How can we deal with fanatical extremists abroad and protect the civil rights of American citizens at home?  The United States earns the respect of the world when we act on our principles instead of violating them.  We spend more on defense than all the nations of the world combined, but we have not bought more security.

  Nationally, the middle class, the backbone of this country, is squeezed by globalization, corporate greed rewarding a few at the very top, and soaring costs for basic needs from gas to health care.

  Our real security as a nation can no longer be measured by our defense budget alone.  The true test of our greatness is whether we have the capacity and the will to adapt to change and innovate at a pace which keeps up with the change thrust upon us.  In 2006, we responded in New Hampshire and across the country by sweeping new leaders into office.  Some are frustrated at the pace of that change.  Congress is a body that thrives on incremental change. I am impatient also.  I can already feel the competing pressures as a member of congress that would sap my passion if I am not vigilant.

  We made a good start in 2006 by returning the voice of the people to the people’s House in both Concord and Washington.  But our work has just begun.  We have a great opportunity as Democrats to seize this moment and rally the nation around us.  I believe Democrats bring a fundamentally different world view to the business of governing.  We recognize that we live together in an interrelated world, that cherishing freedom at home means acting morally abroad.  We know that to project our power in the world, our cultural diplomacy and statesmanship are at least as important as our military might.  To lead the world, we must stand on moral high ground.  A nation which tortures its prisoners in secret prisons cannot hold itself up as a moral and compassionate world leader.  We must lead with the force of our founding principles and strive towards equality, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as the birthright of everyone, everywhere.

  So, let us continue to revitalize our Democratic Party.  Let us build new partnerships and new coalitions while strengthening our traditional ones.  To those on the left, stick with us as we work to resolve the war in Iraq.  To Independents and Republicans of conscience, welcome aboard because we recognize the value of fiscal prudence, free markets and common sense.  We know that this is no time to rest on our laurels.  We have the ability to rise to meet any challenge.  It is time for boldness, policies and programs as large as the issues before us.  As Martin Luther King said, we must respond to the fiery urgency of now.  My friends, this is our country, this is our flag, and this is our time.

Anybody remember Jeffry Taylor? Taylor was the architect of the non-Town Meeting impeachment movement last year, where the strategy of focusing on the Vermont legislature through Section 603 of the Jefferson’s Manual was born. You know, the movement that ripped through the Dem County Committees (and in the process laid the groundwork for much of the Town Meeting success outside of Windham County). Apparently the retconned version, penned here by Darren-Allen-replacement Dan Barlow removes Taylor and allows James Leas to once again cast the movement as an anti-Democratic Party one. Figures.

I’m delighted to see the VT Milk Company thinking outside the box to enhance their long-term survival odds, but is anyone else concerned by their latest endeavor? From the Herald-Argus again:

Purchasing the franchise right to the “One-Shot” soft ice cream machine, the fledgling farmer-owned milk processing company now owns the exclusive distribution line for the innovative creemee machines across New England and New York City. The machines churn out 5-ounce creemees squeezed from pre-packaged, single-serving cartridges, eliminating the mess and labor costs associated with cleaning regular, soft-serve machines.

Now, I’ve been a supporter of this project, but…well…am I reading this right? Is the Pollina-backed operation hanging their profiteering hopes on a new product that will enable employers to cut down employee hours and add a new disposable item into the mix, just to save the 2 hours of cleaning a week? How… uh… all-American (and that’s before you even stop to consider the energy and costs involved in producing this new plastic item and shipping it). This hardly sounds progressive.

They state that the plastic containers are recyclable, but all plastic is technically “recyclable.” The question is, is it in a form that a real recycler will actually accept?

Am I missing something here?

[cross-posted at Norsehorse’s Home Turf, here; as well as Affordable Housing Matters in Vermont blog, here]

The Barre-Montpelier Times Argus currently has a reader poll available on the pages of their Website listed within the right-hand side-column that asks: Should affordable housing be the Legislature’s top priority next session? [scroll down the page and look for the poll listed under the Vent Zone].

If you are able to do so, please visit the site and cast a vote in the poll and also help to spread the word with others you know within the state whom might be interested as well.

Thank you.

And, now a GMD version of the poll as well:

 Loading ...

I spoke with someone who attended the graduation ceremony at West Point where Dick Cheney gave the commencement speech. Cheney then stood on stage and shook hands with each of the 1000 graduates: wait, make that 999. Because one courageous and principled cadet faced Cheney, looked him up and down, decided not to offer his hand and walked on. Cheney was visibly taken aback, and turned to glare after the parting cadet. (We can only imagine the repercussions that this cadet may now face.)
  A West Point cadet is the epitome of honor, duty and respect. That this graduate was willing to show the assembled gathering that he would not deign to honor this dishonorable Vice President with a handshake should have sent tremors of excitement through the crowd. This is probably the first time in six years that anyone has had the temerity and honesty to face down the man whom we could arguably call the Big Evil. Cheney should be getting this treatment from every person he encounters, as should Bush, Gonzales, Rice and the rest of this renegade administration. Of course, these corrupted leaders have insulated themselves from almost any contact with the general public, to the extent of even blocking off the side streets as their armored motorcades (reminiscent of images of  dictator governments the world over) take them from home to work. If they were regularly exposed to common Americans they would discover that there are many who would dare to tell them that this emperor has no clothes.
  This dovetails beautifully with a recent call by Scott Ritter for Americans to ?repudiate? this administration and its policies. Unfortunately, Ritter feels compelled to preface his call with an imperfect and misleading understanding of impeachment efforts, leading him to dismiss the idea and call for repudiation instead. However, repudiation, as explained by Ritter, is more of a concept than a plan for action. How exactly do we go about it and how does it have an effect? The point he misses is that impeachment, a formalized and proscribed Constitutional method to curb executive abuse, is the perfect complement and comrade to whatever ?repudiations? that we can muster.
  Very few of us will be given such a golden opportunity, as was this cadet to repudiate this administration. But we now need to ask ourselves, what do we have available? How can we take a stand every day in every act we take that says, No More Business as Usual? How can we turn our everyday acts into statements of defiance and patriotic dissent? We need to start to look at the connections behind every transaction or exchange that we make. We need to explain to every clerk who takes our money that we are sliding into early stages of fascism and they need to be worried. We need to figure out how to disrupt business as usual in our own neighborhoods. It is likely that any disruptions of business or blockading streets, flash mobbing town council meetings etc. will inconvenience and even anger some folks who are not directly responsible for the current occupation and erosion of rights. But at this point in the game, that will be a necessary cost of dissent. We need everybody to be angry. If they have to start by being angry at us for bringing this to their attention in an uncomfortable way, so be it. As they see how widespread our discontent is, and they understand how many of us are only going to escalate the disruptions, annoyances and inconveniences, they will start to understand the reasons behind our actions.
  The next time that you say to yourself that ?this isn?t the time to mention the occupation or constitutional crimes because it?s not the right setting?, know that you are fooling yourself. From today onward, there is no place where loud dissent is inappropriate. We need to make ourselves ungovernable, pure and simple. Let the bravery of one West Point cadet be your inspiration to take this struggle out of your heart and put in on the table front and center wherever you may be.
  Democratic leaders like John Conyers are starting to soften their resistance to the calls for impeachment. They are asking us to show them that we really want accountability. We can make daily life so uncomfortable and unpredictable that impeachment will be a welcome balm to smooth the roiling waves. We can?t hold investigations and file articles of impeachment ourselves, but we must show our representatives that we no longer consent to be governed by them as they now operate.
  It is time for a Constitutional Restoration. It is up to us to make it happen.

(I’ve been pushing VNRC to post here for a while – hopefully other nonprofits will follow suit… – promoted by odum)

Crossposted from the Vermont Natural Resources Council website

A large-scale commercial bottled water operation is being proposed in central Vermont.

The Montpelier Spring Water Company has, in recent weeks, approached the East Montpelier selectboard and the Montpelier City Council for general statements of approval and right-of-way permissions for the project.

Landowner Daniel Antonovich and project manager Steve Kerr (who is the former secretary of the Vermont Agency of Agriculture) want to capture water from a spring off North Street in East Montpelier and, using a pipeline they hope to build, transport the water to an industrial park in neighboring Montpelier. There they would bottle the water and send it out on trucks.

Vermont must be careful about putting its groundwater up for sale.

For several years, VNRC, Vermonters for a Clean Environment, Water 1st! and others have been sounding the alarm over corporate commodification, privatization and potential depletion of groundwater, one of Vermont’s most important natural resources. Big withdrawals of groundwater threaten neighbors’ wells (more than half of Vermonters get their home drinking water from groundwater) and also endanger nearby streams and ponds that are fed by groundwater.

Vermont lags far behind many states, including neighboring New Hampshire, in protecting its groundwater and until Vermont has a groundwater protection program in place, Vermont is a sitting duck, vulnerable to big water withdrawals, like the one proposed in central Vermont.

VNRC sits on a governor-appointed task force studying the groundwater issue. By January of 2008, the task force will make recommendations to the Legislature for consideration in crafting a groundwater protection program. This timeline, however, leaves proposals like the water bottling operation in Montpelier moving forward with limited public scrutiny and potentially insufficient analysis of the impact it could have on the resource and community.

So far there aren’t many specifics on this East Montpelier project, but VNRC will continue to ask the questions and evaluate the science on this and similar proposals that could affect this finite and fundamental resource.

Montpelier and the state of Vermont must move forward swiftly and thoughtfully as opportunities to commercialize, bottle and sell the state’s water unfold. In an increasingly thirsty world, communities have a lot to lose with lack of foresight and caution on how the state’s fresh water resources are used.

Read the Times Argus story about the recent meeting at Montpelier City Hall here:

http://www.timesargu…

For more information about VNRC’s work to protect groundwater in Vermont or to get involved, contact Water Program Director Jon Groveman at 802-223-2328 ext. 119 or jgroveman@vnrc.org