A group of young people are suing Montana for choosing corporations over citizens – what will happen

Increasingly, young people are taking to court to make governments listen. The scientific evidence for climate change has been known by many people for at least 70 years (and suggested far earlier).

We need more action to follow from judgements like this.

It does seem reasonable for children to sue their parents generation, for the costs that their short sightedness will cost.

Alarmingly, the trial comes shortly after the states legislature (republican majority) passed a new rule that the fossil fuel industry wanted, which blocks local government from encouraging renewable energy, and at the same time, increases the cost to challenge the fossil fuel industries.

It is not expected to have a big effect in the Montana state, but over the 2 weeks laid out devastating evidence for both the audience in the house and those outside.

Lawyers for the Montana Attorney General (a republican) tried repeatedly to get the case thrown out over procedural issues.

The state has a 1972 protective constitution which requires officials to maintain a “clean and healthy environment” which is only included in a few other states laws.

Unfortunately the state district judge, has already narrowed the case, as a result if they win, show would not order officials to formulate a new approach to climate change. Instead, she would issue “declaratory Judgement” stating that officials violated the state constitution.

It is thought that if the plaintiffs win, even if there is little direct action as a result, it could cause ripples which might well cause the change needed. The trial ended 2 days ago, and we are just waiting for the ruling.

If the US beef industry is deploying tricks similar to fossil fuels and smoking to delay action, what should we do?

It is, unfortunately, a fact, that meat eaters create a significant extra quantity of carbon released into the air. How much? Well this varies from place to place, and product to product.

While many think that grass fed beef is good for the environment, the methane emissions swing this badly

There are an increasingly large number of people who are recognizing this issue. Now while some will argue that without the meat industry, much of the UK farmland would be built on, and that this would be disastrous for the environment are missing the point. We live on an island, and as such it is in our own best interests to make sure that the worlds ice sheets do not melt.

Continue reading “If the US beef industry is deploying tricks similar to fossil fuels and smoking to delay action, what should we do?”

Montana (and many other states) cannot be trusted to maintain sensible populations of grizzly bears or wolves, so why do they have control?

In 2020, Trump gave responsibility for managing wildlife populations back to the states. Now one might argue that this is the right thing to do, after all it is democracy, but is it?

Wolves are a natural part of the ecosystem in Montana, with a stronghold in the Rockies, but this was a population that lost its protection under Trump

Many of the states in the USA are horrifically gerrymandered, with some having a small minority overruling the great majority. There are many intentional ways that this is done (republicans have been very good at it over time – there are been 2 times in recent years where democrats got more votes but lost.

Continue reading “Montana (and many other states) cannot be trusted to maintain sensible populations of grizzly bears or wolves, so why do they have control?”

Resolution to ban the sale of electric cars in Wyoming from 2035 effectively dead

A group of republican state lawmakers introduced a resolution that called for the sale of electric cars to be phased out by 2035. Apparently, the resolutions sponsor does not want them banned (in which case a very poorly worded resolution) he just wanted to make a statement about the phasing out of gas-powered vehicles in other states.

So why was all this undertaken? Apparently a group of the states republican lawmakers are aiming to safeguard the oil and gas industries.

It was suggested that the bill would hinder the states ability to trade with other states “Wyoming’s vast stretches of highway, coupled with the lack of electric vehicle charging infrastructure, make the widespread use of electric vehicles impracticable for the state” so the bill stated.

This is frankly stupid: at the moment there is little charging infrastructure, because there are few electric cars. However, the ban is intended to come into force in 2035 which is roughly 2 whole car cycles into the future. Do these people really believe that there wont be more charging infrastructure by then?

Among the reason cited are the following:

  • Batteries used in electric vehicles could contain critical minerals whose “domestic supply is limited and at risk for disruption”
  • Minerals used in electric batteries are not easily recyclable or disposable, meaning that municipal landfills in the state could be required to develop practices to dispose of these minerals in a safe and responsible manner
  • The proliferation of electric vehicles at the expense of gas-powered vehicles will have deleterious impacts on Wyoming’s communities and will be detrimental to Wyoming’s economy and the ability for the country to efficiently engage in Commerce

Lets take these points in turn:

Point one, suggests that there will be a problem supplying the minerals required for the batteries. This is pretty ridiculous, as if this is true then they have nothing to worry about. Having said that, with the advance of sodium batteries and the increasing quantity of lithium that can be captured from many sources, it is simply not true.

Point two is also false: many of these minerals are very valuable, and it is far cheaper to extract minerals from former batteries than from the ground. There is a rapidly growing industry to extract as much of these minerals as is possible for reuse. Will municipals have to be able to deal with some of these issues, of course, and they will adapt easily as they have many times in the past.

Point three is likely to be true, and is I believe the sole real reason. This move was intended to stop the electric vehicle industry before it got going in the state to protect the oil and gas industry (and the large contributions that flow to politicians from these businesses. I would argue that it makes the politicians look both stupid and corrupt.

The resolutions sponsor said that he did not really want to ban electric cars, but merely make a statement about phasing out gas powered vehicles in other states. Of course what should really be remembered, is that while the environmental catastrophe that we are facing needs an end to combustion engine cars, the cost savings are so extreme, that the number of combustion engine cars people want to by in 12 years is likely to be extremely low.

It is fact that, not only are electric cars quickly reaching similar sticker price to combustion engine cars, but even now over the lifetime of the car, they are vastly cheaper – with most people paying hundreds rather than thousands to fuel them each year.

Republicans in Wyoming are trying to squash the electric car, to save the fossil fuel industry

In December Oregan republican officials approved regulations that would ban the sale of gasoline powered cars from 2035. This is fantastic news, but it appears that it is one step forwards and one back – Wyoming republicans are looking to ban the sale of all electric vehicles, in what lawmakers are calling an effort to preserve the states fossil fuel industry.

If you live in Wyoming, make sure you do not vote for any of these men, unless you want them fighting for climate change, and against cleaner, cheaper and safer cars
Continue reading “Republicans in Wyoming are trying to squash the electric car, to save the fossil fuel industry”

Could road crossings threaten the survival of the Texas Ocelot?

Ocelots are often thought of as relatively exotic animal. Looking like a small leopard or Jaguar, this is not particularly surprising. Never-the-less, like their bigger cousin, the jaguar, they are a native cat of the USA.

Unfortunately, as it is dangerous, this Ocelot crossing is not rare

Road deaths are a significant problem, as with a total population not thought to number more than 60-80, 8 were lost in under a year (2015-2016). Texas has created 27 wildlife crossings, with many in Ocelot areas, but clearly more are needed, along with driver education.

Perhaps more unhelpful, as Ocelots are largely nocturnal, they are usually crossing the road when hardest to see. Once relatively common in the southern USA, just 1% of its optimal habitat remains, and this is criss-crossed by road.

Returning Jaguars to the USA

While few animals have been completely exterminated from north America in the last 300 years there are a few on the brink.

One such animal is the Jaguar.

Could Southern Arizona become a place for ecotourism in the future?

The last known Jaguar roams the Rocky lands of Southern Arizona and is called Sombra. The last known female was shot 60 years ago this year. Conservationists are calling for Jaguars to be reintroduced into the Gila national forest, a 3 million acre wilderness in New Mexico, along with protection for millions more acres which Sombra currently roams.

Continue reading “Returning Jaguars to the USA”

Biden expected to sign into law new big cat ownership rules, which will curb or end private ownership

It is thought that there is currently about 10,000 big cats in private ownership, often in poor conditions and of no conservation benefit. While as much as 5000 are tigers (more than the 3900 estimated to remain in the wild across all subspecies, and some estimates put the number of tigers as high as 8000) there are also lions jaguars and leopards amongst other species.

This is not the right way to treat an animal like a tiger.

Importantly, however well-meaning the owners are, the very existence of this pet trade means that any big cat within easy reach of humans becomes a target. This week the bill: big cat public safety act, passed through the house of representatives. Currently 30 states allow tiger ownership, and a license is just $30. Also, as breeders in the USA have generally mixed up all the subspecies, these tigers do not create a back-stop for the wild population, as these hybrid tigers are unlikely to still have the genetic ability to cope in the extreme heat/cold/desert/flooded area that they used to call home.

Continue reading “Biden expected to sign into law new big cat ownership rules, which will curb or end private ownership”

Rare good news from USA. Manchin tried to attach energy bill to appropriations legislation: failed

In the USA, much to the frustration of many politicians, it is possible to attach legislation to another bill, even when there is nothing that links the two. In this case Jo Minchin’s legislation would have deregulated and changed permitting reforms for fossil fuel projects, and were supposed to be attached to a must pass defence bill. This ability to attach irrelevant legislation must be ended.

In other words, had he been allowed to do it, the bill would have had to be passed, as the defence part was required.

Continue reading “Rare good news from USA. Manchin tried to attach energy bill to appropriations legislation: failed”
See Animals Wild