While the Senate was debating this bill, over a million gallons of “treated and partially treated” effluent containing human waste spilled from a Montpelier facility into the Winooski River. Other spills in the weeks before occurred in Rutland, Burlington, South Burlington and Essex Junction. That effluent heads downstream out to Lake Champlain.
After looking over H.926, a lawyer friend of mine asked me, 'Why do we now have to defend the environment from environmental organizations?'
The criticisms of the documentary reveal how much power and money lie behind the renewables-as-savior myth.
McKibben deserves credit for sounding the alarm about climate change early on, but now he should tell people the truth.
Clever marketing has induced some of us to engage in moral relativism, ethics without substance and environmentalism at the cost of its soul.
One of Bill McKibben’s faulty assumptions is that industrial renewables meaningfully address climate change.
A film touring Vermont tells viewers that industrial-scale renewables are the solution – not only to climate change, but to the more localized environmental destruction the film decries.
How should Vermont respond to climate change? Few Vermonters would say, “Make money from it.” However, this was the theme of a recent conference.
Today, the most ardent advocates of industrial buildout in Vermont’s most fragile ecosystems are environmental organizations. So what is happening?
Environmentalism has been successfully mainstreamed, at the cost of its soul. This co-opted version isn't about protecting the landbase from the ever-expanding empire of humans. It’s about sustaining the comfort levels we feel entitled to without exhausting the resources required.