<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Defending Water for Life in Washington</title>
	<atom:link href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington</link>
	<description>Water for life, not for profit!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:51:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Grand Canyon Banning Plastic Water Bottle Sales</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/grand-canyon-banning-plastic-water-bottle-sales/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/grand-canyon-banning-plastic-water-bottle-sales/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:43:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sandra</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/?p=3347</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Feb. 6, 2012</p> Associated Press GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK Disposable plastic water bottles soon won&#8217;t be sold at the Grand Canyon. The National Park Service announced Monday that it has approved a plan to eliminate the sale of the bottles within 30 days. The bottles make up about 20 percent of the Park&#8217;s waste and 30 percent of recyclables. Visitors can fill up reusable containers at water stations, though the ban does not keep them from bringing disposable bottles into [...]<p align="right">Continue reading <a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/grand-canyon-banning-plastic-water-bottle-sales/">Grand Canyon Banning Plastic Water Bottle Sales</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Feb. 6, 2012</p>
<div>Associated Press</div>
<div>GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK</div>
<div></div>
<div>Disposable plastic water bottles soon won&#8217;t be sold at the Grand Canyon.</div>
<div></div>
<div>The National Park Service announced Monday that it has approved a plan to eliminate the sale of the bottles within 30 days. The bottles make up about 20 percent of the Park&#8217;s waste and 30 percent of recyclables. Visitors can fill up reusable containers at water stations, though the ban does not keep them from bringing disposable bottles into the park.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Park Service Director Jon Jarvis had nixed a bottled ban at the Grand Canyon in late 2010. A former park superintendent had raised suspicion that the Coca-Cola Company, a major water bottle producer, unduly influenced the Park Service. But the agency and Coca-Cola denied that.</div>
<div></div>
<div>Jarvis recently released a national policy outlining how park superintendents could institute a ban.</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/grand-canyon-banning-plastic-water-bottle-sales/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Whose Valley is it Anyway?</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/whose-valley-is-it-anyway/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/whose-valley-is-it-anyway/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:26:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sandra</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Community Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/?p=3343</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 9th Annual Skagit Human Rights Festival March 2012 Whose Valley is it Anyway?  Corporate Power or Community Power? March is Human Rights Month in Skagit County, and the Skagit Human Rights Festival has some great events planned to put relevant conversations on the community table. Lee Mann Exhibition&#8211;Art opening, Thurs., March 1, 5 p.m, Skagit Valley College multipurpose room. Letters and photos of longtime Skagit Valley human rights advocate Lee Mann on display. His son, Bryce Mann, to make the [...]<p align="right">Continue reading <a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/whose-valley-is-it-anyway/">Whose Valley is it Anyway?</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>The 9th Annual Skagit Human Rights Festival</div>
<div>March 2012</div>
<div></div>
<div><strong>Whose Valley is it Anyway? </strong></div>
<div><strong>Corporate Power or Community Power?</strong></div>
<div></div>
<div>March is Human Rights Month in Skagit County, and the Skagit Human Rights Festival has some great events planned to put relevant conversations on the community table.</div>
<ul>
<li><strong>Lee Mann Exhibition&#8211;Art opening, Thurs., March 1, 5 p.m, Skagit Valley College multipurpose room. </strong>Letters and photos of longtime Skagit Valley human rights advocate Lee Mann on display. His son, Bryce Mann, to make the presentation.</li>
<li><strong>Human Rights Display, Fri., March 2, 5-7 p.m., Lincoln Theatre Art Bar, downtown Mount Vernon.</strong> Skagit art pieces will relate to corporations, civil liberties, water and labor. Artists Richard Olmsted, Thais Armstrong, Sue Wren, Jessica Gigot and Kerry Scott.</li>
<li><strong>Corporations and the Rise of Occupy, Thur., March 8, 7 p.m., Phillip Tarro Theatre, Skagit Valley College.</strong> Movie showing of <em>Inside Job </em>about the U. S. financial crisis followed by a corporate personhood Q&amp;A panel session. Panel members involved with the Northwest Occupy Movement.</li>
<li><strong>Civil Liberties and E-Verify, Thurs., March 15, 7 p.m., Phillip Tarro Theatre, Skagit Valley College.</strong> Lt. Col. Margaret Stock (ret.), political science instructor and award winning lawyer from Alaska, explains how the E-Verify national database will impact all of us&#8211;not only undocumented immigrants.</li>
<li><strong>Defending Water, Thurs., March 22, 7 p.m., Lincoln Theatre, downtown Mount Vernon.</strong> Sandra Spargo, Alliance for Democracy, will show the movie TAPPED about the bottled water industry and will discuss the Anacortes contract to build a bottled water/beverage &amp; food manufacturing plant entitled to five million gallons of water per day.</li>
<li><strong>Labor, Thurs., March 29, 7 p.m., Lincoln Theatre, downtown Mount Vernon. </strong>Jeff Johnson, President of the Washington State Labor Council, and young labor activists will describe how unions champion the rights of all workers and will show two short movies: <em>Eyes on the Fries</em> and <em>We Are the ILWU</em>.</li>
</ul>
<div>Visit <a href="http://www.skagithrf.wordpress.com/">www.skagithrf.wordpress.com</a> for a complete list of event details.</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/whose-valley-is-it-anyway/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Skagit Human Rights Festival</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/skagit-human-rights-festival/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/skagit-human-rights-festival/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:11:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sandra</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Community Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/?p=3330</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/02/SHRF12posterfinalB4.jpg"></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Skagit Human Rights Festival 2012</p> <p>To download a full size copy of the poster, right click + &#8220;save as&#8221; <a title="Skagit Human Rights Festival 2012 Poster" href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/02/SHRF12posterfinalB4-646x1024.jpg" target="_blank">HERE</a> or on the image above!</p> ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="attachment_3331" class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="width: 522px"><a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/02/SHRF12posterfinalB4.jpg"><img class=" wp-image-3331 " src="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/02/SHRF12posterfinalB4-646x1024.jpg" alt="" width="512" height="811" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Skagit Human Rights Festival 2012</p></div>
<p>To download a full size copy of the poster, right click + &#8220;save as&#8221; <a title="Skagit Human Rights Festival 2012 Poster" href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/02/SHRF12posterfinalB4-646x1024.jpg" target="_blank">HERE</a> or on the image above!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/skagit-human-rights-festival/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Grand Canyon banning sales of bottled water</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/grand-canyon-banning-sales-of-bottled-water/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/grand-canyon-banning-sales-of-bottled-water/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:44:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Other States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bottled water]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coca cola]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grand canyon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/grand-canyon-banning-sales-of-bottled-water/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>By Miguel Llanos, <a href="http://msnbc.com/" target="_blank">msnbc.com</a></p> <p>Activists concerned that Coca-Cola might be influencing National Park Service policy were breathing a bit easier Tuesday after the Grand Canyon National Park announced it would eliminate the sale of bottled water inside the park within 30 days.</p> <p>full story here:  <a href="http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/07/10340196-grand-canyon-banning-sales-of-bottled-water" target="_blank">http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/07/10340196-grand-canyon-banning-sales-of-bottled-water</a></p> ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Miguel Llanos, <a href="http://msnbc.com/" target="_blank">msnbc.com</a></p>
<p>Activists concerned that Coca-Cola might be influencing National Park Service policy were breathing a bit easier Tuesday after the Grand Canyon National Park announced it would eliminate the sale of bottled water inside the park within 30 days.</p>
<p>full story here:  <a href="http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/07/10340196-grand-canyon-banning-sales-of-bottled-water" target="_blank">http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/07/10340196-grand-canyon-banning-sales-of-bottled-water</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/grand-canyon-banning-sales-of-bottled-water/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bottled Water Banished at University of Vermont</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bottled-water-banished-at-university-of-vermont/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bottled-water-banished-at-university-of-vermont/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 18:41:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bottled water]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bottled-water-banished-at-university-of-vermont/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Vending machines to feature &#8216;healthy choices&#8217; <p>By Lauren Drasler, Assistant New Editor &#124; The Vermont Cynic &#124; Thursday, February 2, 2012</p> <p>The sale of bottled water on campus will end Jan. 1, 2013, makingUVM one of the first institutions nationwide to pass this type of sustainable beverage policy, according to University Communications.</p> <p>UVM will remove bottled water from its 57 vending machines and in retail outlets as well asmandate that one-third of the drinks in vending machines be healthy choices,University Communications stated.</p> <p>Though the administration [...]<p align="right">Continue reading <a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bottled-water-banished-at-university-of-vermont/">Bottled Water Banished at University of Vermont</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>Vending machines to feature &#8216;healthy choices&#8217;</h2>
<p>By Lauren Drasler, Assistant New Editor | The Vermont Cynic | Thursday, February 2, 2012</p>
<p>The sale of bottled water on campus will end Jan. 1, 2013, makingUVM one of the first institutions nationwide to pass this type of sustainable beverage policy, according to University Communications.</p>
<p>UVM will remove bottled water from its 57 vending machines and in retail outlets as well asmandate that one-third of the drinks in vending machines be healthy choices,University Communications stated.</p>
<p>Though the administration made this decision, Director for the Office of Sustainability Gioia Thompson said that student groups such as Vermont Student Environmental Program (VSTEP) really led the way.</p>
<p>&#8220;In 2010 and 2011, Mikayla McDonald and Marlee Baron each served as both VSTEP president and SGA senator,&#8221; Thompson said.  &#8221;They were key in connecting with SGA committees and leaders, who responded with resolutions.&#8221;</p>
<p>Thompson said that UVM&#8217;s campus has 200 water fountains that can easily be retrofitted with water bottle filling stations like the ones in the Davis Center for about $300 each.</p>
<p>&#8220;Other fountains will need to be replaced, costing in the thousands,&#8221; she said. &#8220;There may be some new fountain locations requiring new plumbing, as is the case in the Waterman building&#8217;s recent fountain upgrade.&#8221;</p>
<p>Vice President of Finance and Administration Richard Cate estimates that the cost of updating and replacing water fountains throughout campus will be about $100,000.</p>
<p>&#8220;This action is not likely to save the University any money, but hopefully students will save</p>
<p>money by having better access to chilled drinking water for which they do not have to pay,&#8221; he</p>
<p>said.</p>
<p>The Coca-Cola contract, which gives the company exclusive pouring rights at the University and is set to expire in June, generates $482,000 in revenue for UVM, Cate said.  Of that revenue, some is used to directly benefit students.</p>
<p>&#8220;$157,000 of the $482,000 from the current contract goes to student financial aid,&#8221; he said.</p>
<p>Cate confirmed that revenue from the new contracts will also be directed toward student aid.</p>
<p>President of VSTEP Greg Francese said that his club has worked directly with the Office of Sustainability and student organizations in order to educate the community about environmental issues such as the impact of bottled water.</p>
<p>Francese said that VSTEP&#8217;s main goal for the past five years has been to ban the sale of bottled water, with campaigns such as Bring Your Own Bottle days, in which students are encouraged to not buy bottled water for one day.</p>
<p>&#8220;We wanted people to think about why they&#8217;re purchasing bottled water,&#8221; he said. &#8220;The way we&#8217;ve done that is basically just by educating people about why you can get virtually the same product for free out of a water fountain.&#8221;</p>
<p>Though the decision to end sales of bottled water on campus is finally official, Francese said the news has not sunk in yet.</p>
<p>&#8220;It feels surreal, I guess it hasn&#8217;t really hit me yet,&#8221; he said. &#8220;There&#8217;s been a lot of congratulatory emails, and I got interviewed by one of the local news stations, but it just doesn&#8217;t feel like it&#8217;s happening.</p>
<p>&#8220;When it happens it will be great,&#8221; he said.</p>
<p>Former VSTEP president Mikayla McDonald said that she is very supportive of UVM&#8217;s decision to let the Coke contract expire and to remove the sale of bottled water from campus.</p>
<p>&#8220;UVM has shown great leadership with this action and will undoubtedly motivate students in other American colleges and universities to take similar initiatives,&#8221; she said.</p>
<p>McDonald said she has a variety of issues with the bottled water industry.</p>
<p>&#8220;Single-serving, plastic-packaged bottled water is one of those products which has a 100 percent manufactured demand,&#8221; she said. &#8220;That means that there was essentially no need or want for it until bottled water companies started spending billions of dollars on advertising.&#8221;</p>
<p>These advertising campaigns have successfully convinced many Americans that municipal tap water is dirty and dangerous while bottled water is cleaner and healthier, McDonald said. In fact, the opposite is true.</p>
<p>Many students said they agree with the University&#8217;s decision to stop selling bottled water.</p>
<p>&#8220;I think it&#8217;s awesome,&#8221; senior Audrey Stout said.  &#8220;We don&#8217;t need any more plastic, so I&#8217;m all for this idea.&#8221;</p>
<p>Other students agreed that bottled water is a waste.</p>
<p>&#8220;There is plenty of opportunity to get free water from the fountains, and reusable water bottles are always being given away here,&#8221; sophomore Isaiah Cory said.</p>
<p>Though most students said they supported the administration&#8217;s decision, others said they didn&#8217;t like the idea of completely banning water bottle sales.</p>
<p>&#8220;Anytime there is a ban it&#8217;s an infringement,&#8221; senior Ben Zabriskie said.  &#8220;If the University put a $1 tariff on bottled water, then that money could be used to support conservation instead of completely banning bottled water sales.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bottled-water-banished-at-university-of-vermont/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bellingham, WA Rights-Based Ordinance Proposed to Stop Coal Trains</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bellingham-wa-rights-based-ordinance-proposed-to-stop-coal-trains/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bellingham-wa-rights-based-ordinance-proposed-to-stop-coal-trains/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 18:08:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Community Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Grassroots Movements]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rights of Nature]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bellingham-wa-rights-based-ordinance-proposed-to-stop-coal-trains/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by: <a title="Posts by Coal Free Bellingham" href="http://readthedirt.org/author/coal-free-bellingham/">Coal Free Bellingham</a> Posted on: January 27, 2012 <p>Editor’s Note: Bellingham has taken the first step in following the example of towns and municipalities like Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, who have recently explicitly asserted their rights as autonomous communities. Pittsburgh has outlawed all <a title="Hydraulic Fracturing" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing" target="_blank">Hydraulic Fracturing</a>practices within its city limits. With support by the <a title="CELDF" href="http://www.celdf.org/" target="_blank">Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund</a>, <a title="No Coal!" href="http://coal-free-bellingham.org/" target="_blank">No Coal!</a>, a Bellingham citizen-led political action committee has introduced an ordinance [...]<p align="right">Continue reading <a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bellingham-wa-rights-based-ordinance-proposed-to-stop-coal-trains/">Bellingham, WA Rights-Based Ordinance Proposed to Stop Coal Trains</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h5>by: <strong><a title="Posts by Coal Free Bellingham" href="http://readthedirt.org/author/coal-free-bellingham/">Coal Free Bellingham</a> </strong>Posted on: <strong>January 27, 2012</strong></h5>
<p><em>Editor’s Note: Bellingham has taken the first step in following the example of towns and municipalities like Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, who have recently explicitly asserted their rights as autonomous communities. Pittsburgh has outlawed all <a title="Hydraulic Fracturing" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_fracturing" target="_blank">Hydraulic Fracturing</a>practices within its city limits. With support by the </em><a title="CELDF" href="http://www.celdf.org/" target="_blank"><em>Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund</em></a>,<em> </em><em><a title="No Coal!" href="http://coal-free-bellingham.org/" target="_blank">No Coal!</a>, a Bellingham citizen-led political action committee has introduced an ordinance to the City of Bellingham that would make coal transport a legal <a title="Nuisance" href="http://www.nuisancelaw.com/" target="_blank">nuisance</a> and prohibit the transportation of coal through Bellingham’s city limits, which would essentially paralyze the proposed <a title="Cherry Point" href="http://readthedirt.org/2011/06/23/mckibben-on-expansion-of-coal-exports-at-cherry-point-whatcom-county/" target="_blank">Cherry Point Coal terminal</a>. The ordinance technically violates the<a title="Commerce Clause" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause" target="_blank">Commerce Clause</a> in the U.S. Constitution, which leaves issues of interstate commerce—like coal trains—to the federal government, not local communities. For more on why No Coal! believes the City of Bellingham, and all communities need rights-based ordinances <a title="Why?" href="http://coal-free-bellingham.org/why/" target="_blank">click here</a>.</em></p>
<p>The Ordinance:</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Proposal for a</p>
<p>Bellingham Community Bill of Rights</p>
<p><strong>to be adopted by citizens’ initiative</strong></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Whereas, in America we have a tradition of deciding for ourselves – and for our children;</p>
<p>Whereas, the residents of the City of Bellingham possess the inherent and inalienable  right to govern their own community, on the basis, without limitation, of the statement within the Declaration of Independence’s that governments are instituted to secure the rights of people, and of the Washington Constitution’s recognition that ―All political power is inherent in the people;</p>
<p>Whereas, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, “whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”</p>
<p>Whereas, the assertion of constitutional rights, including civil rights, by the legal constructions known as Corporations has fundamentally unbalanced our system of government, and the people of Bellingham desire to restore a balanced and democratic system of government;</p>
<p>Whereas, the use of coal for energy production has furthered global climate change, with that climate change threatening the very survival of human and natural communities;</p>
<p>Whereas, the State of Washington has acknowledged the threat from the use of coal, and therefore decided last year to adopt the Coal-Free Future for Washington legislation which will close the last remaining coal-burning power plant in Washington State;</p>
<p>Whereas, the State of Washington and the United States hold a public trust from the people of the State of Washington and the people of the United States under which they are obliged to protect the climate of the State of Washington and of the United States from climate change, and the State of Washington and the United States have failed to act in accordance with the public trust, and the people of Bellingham find it necessary to act on their own behalf;</p>
<p>Whereas, the people of Bellingham find it necessary to reduce the progress of climate change by creating a new structure of law, which recognizes that the residents and ecosystems of Bellingham have the right to a healthy, natural climate unaltered by the transporting, handling and burning of coal, and which recognizes the rights of ecosystems to exist and flourish;</p>
<p>Whereas, that new structure of law is embodied in this ordinance, which recognizes a Bill of Rights for the residents and ecosystems of Bellingham, and which bans activities related to the transportation of coal through the municipality as a violation of those rights;</p>
<p>Whereas, existing concepts of law such as nuisance and toxic trespass may be expanded to support the right of the people of Bellingham to protect themselves from activities related to the transportation of coal through the municipality;</p>
<p>Whereas, since Corporations engaged in the extraction, distribution, and use of coal routinely use corporate ”powers” and ”rights” to overturn community lawmaking focused on building sustainability, this ordinance removes legal “powers” and “rights” from those Corporations to ensure that the powers and rights of the community are superior to the “powers” and “rights” claimed by those Corporations;</p>
<p>Whereas, certain distant corporate operators desire to mine coal in massive quantities in Wyoming and Montana, to transport such coal by rail from east to west across Washington State, from south to north in Western Washington, and through the center of the City of Bellingham, to build an ecologically destructive coal port at Cherry Point just north of Bellingham, to transport such coal in massive freighters across Puget Sound and the Pacific Ocean to Asia, where it will be burned in power plants, increasing the rate of global climate change (all the foregoing being referred to as the “Proposed Corporate Coal Project”);</p>
<p>Whereas, the Proposed Corporate Coal Project will cut off the city from its waterfront, impeding plans for development and for opening the waterfront for public enjoyment, and cutting out the resulting jobs;</p>
<p>Whereas, the adoption of this ordinance by the people of Bellingham is a necessary first step, but is insufficient by itself either to stop the coal trains on all their possible routes or the coal port or to bring about the structural legal changes that are necessary and the people of Bellingham stand ready to collaborate with the people of Whatcom County and Washington State and beyond in order to obtain these ends;</p>
<p>Now, therefore, the people of the City of Bellingham hereby adopt this Ordinance, which shall be known and may be cited as “The Bellingham Community Bill of Rights.”</p>
<p>Section 1<strong>—</strong>Findings and Intent</p>
<p>The people of Bellingham believe that the protection of human and natural communities from environmental threats constitutes the highest and best use of the police powers that this municipality possesses. We also believe that local legislation that embodies the interests of the community is mandated by the doctrine of the consent of the governed and the right to local, community self-government.  Thus, we hereby adopt this ordinance, which establishes a Bill of Rights for the residents, natural communities and ecosystems of the City, bans activities related to the transportation of coal within the City, and nullifies state and federal laws, constitutional provisions, permits, and other authorizations which interfere with the rights secured by this ordinance.</p>
<p>The people of Bellingham recognize that a healthy, natural climate – and environmental and economic sustainability – cannot be achieved if the rights of municipal majorities are routinely overridden by corporate minorities claiming “powers” and “rights”.  The people of Bellingham also recognize that sustainability cannot be achieved within a system of preemption which enables those corporate decision-makers to wield state and federal governmental power to override local self-government, and which restricts municipalities only to that lawmaking specifically authorized by state government.</p>
<p>The people of Bellingham are unwilling to accept an economic system in which  communities, people and eco-systems bear the massive costs of corporate operations in the social, ecological and economic spheres, and in which such a system is supported by the existing structure of law. Conventional economic ideology that characterizes these costs as “externalities,” and then proceeds to ignore them, is inadequate for the needs of society and for ecosystems.</p>
<p>The people of Bellingham find that the harms arising from the Proposed Corporate Coal Project are numerous and affect every sphere of life. Among them are:</p>
<p>1) Reduced access to the Bellingham waterfront, to the waterfront at the proposed coal             port and to the waterfront everywhere where the trains will run along the shore</p>
<p>2) Destruction of the peace of the parks along the waterfront, including Zuanich Park,             Boulevard Park, Port of Bellingham Marine Park, Teddy Bear Cove, and Larrabee             State Park.</p>
<p>3) Not being able to proceed with the community’s vision for waterfront redevelopment             (most especially of the Georgia Pacific site, now largely empty, and on the other             side of the tracks from downtown Bellingham</p>
<p>4) Not being able to preserve the beauty of the waterfront</p>
<p>5) Not being able to use existing rail facilities for other valuable uses, e.g. passenger trains.</p>
<p>6) Noise</p>
<p>7) Pollution of air, land and water from coal dust and freighter diesel exhaust</p>
<p>8] Heath threats, including without limitation</p>
<ul>
<li>a) Impaired pulmonary development in adolescents;</li>
<li>b) Increased cardiopulmonary mortality and all-cause mortality;</li>
<li>c) Measurable pulmonary inflammation;</li>
<li>d) Increased severity and frequency of asthma attacks, ER visits, and hospital admissions in children;</li>
<li>e) Increased rates of myocardial heart attacks in adults;</li>
<li>f) Increased risk of cancer;</li>
<li>g) Increased risk of chronic bronchitis;</li>
<li>h) Increased risk of emphysema;</li>
<li>i) Increased risk of pulmonary fibrosis; and</li>
<li>j) Environmental contamination through the leaching of toxic heavy metals; all as             documented by Whatcom Docs.</li>
</ul>
<p>9) Interruption of ambulances, fire trucks and police</p>
<p>10) Interruptions for people and local businesses</p>
<p>11) Loss of opportunity for local businesses</p>
<p>12) Safety threats</p>
<p>13) Threats to wildlife</p>
<p>14) Loss of property values near the tracks</p>
<p>15) Ecological harm to air, land and water in the vicinity of the proposed port at Cherry             Point</p>
<p>16) Harm to the fisheries in the vicinity of Cherry Point</p>
<p>17) Species extinction</p>
<p>18) Multifarious harm to the communities in the vicinity of Cherry Point, such as Birch             Bay, Custer, Ferndale, the Lummi Nation, and Blaine</p>
<p>19) Ecological harm in Puget Sound</p>
<p>20) Safety threats from increasingly dense freighter traffic in Puget Sound and from             increasingly large freighters</p>
<p>21) Ocean acidification</p>
<p>22) Furthering global climate change through the burning of the coal in Asia, which will             cause health and other impacts to the residents and ecosystems of the City of             Bellingham and around the world.</p>
<p>The people of Bellingham find that global climate change poses a significant threat to the health, safety, and welfare of the human and natural communities within the City, and that  those communities possess a right to a healthy, natural climate unaltered by coal emissions, and that certain proposed corporate activities violate that right.</p>
<p>The people of Bellingham recognize that merely regulating activities related to the transportation of coal through the City enables and legalizes these harms to occur, thus violating the rights of residents and natural communities.</p>
<p>Section 2<strong>—</strong>Definitions</p>
<p>(a) “City” and “Bellingham” mean the City of Bellingham, a Washington municipal</p>
<p>corporation.</p>
<p>(b) “Coal” shall mean any combustible sedimentary rock.</p>
<p>(c) “Corporation(s)” for purposes of this ordinance, shall include any corporation,             limited partnership, limited liability partnership, business trust, or limited liability             company organized for profit under the laws of any state of the United States or             under the laws of any country, and any other for-profit entity that possesses state             conferred limited liability attributes for its owners, directors, officers, and/or             managers.</p>
<p>Section 3—Statements of Law—Rights of Bellingham Residents and the Natural</p>
<p>Environment</p>
<p>(a) People as Sovereign. The municipal corporation known as the City of Bellingham shall  be the governing authority responsible to, and governed by, the residents of the City. Use of the City of Bellingham municipal corporation by the sovereign people of Bellingham to make law shall not be construed to limit or surrender the sovereign authority or immunities of the people to a municipal corporation that is subordinate to them in all respects at all times. The people at all times enjoy and retain an inalienable and indefeasible right to self-governance in the community where they reside.</p>
<p>(b) Right to Self-Government. All residents of the City of Bellingham possess the             fundamental and inalienable right to a form of governance where they live which             recognizes that all power is inherent in the people, that all free governments are            founded on the people’s authority and consent, and that corporate entities and their             directors and managers shall not enjoy special privileges or powers under the law            which make community majorities subordinate to them.</p>
<p>(c) Rights of Natural Communities. Natural communities and ecosystems, including, but not limited to, flora, fauna, the atmosphere, soils, wetlands, bays, streams, rivers, aquifers, and other water systems, possess inalienable and fundamental rights to exist and flourish within the City of Bellingham. Residents of the City of Bellingham, acting individually or collectively, or the City itself, or the City acting together with one or more residents, shall possess legal standing to enforce those rights on behalf of those natural communities and ecosystems.</p>
<p>(d) Right to a Sustainable Energy Future. All residents, natural communities, and ecosystems in the City of Bellingham possess a right to a sustainable energy future and a right to adopt laws and policies to secure this future. That right shall include the authority to require the development, production, and use of energy from renewable fuel sources.</p>
<p>(e) Right to Climate. All residents, natural communities and ecosystems in the City of Bellingham possess a fundamental and inalienable right to a healthy, natural climate.</p>
<p>(f) Rights as Self-Executing. All rights delineated and secured by this ordinance shall be self-executing and these rights shall be enforceable against Corporations, in addition to governmental and other public entities.</p>
<p><strong>Section 4—Statements of Law </strong><strong>–</strong><strong> </strong><strong>Prohibitions Necessary to Secure Bill of Rights’ Protections</strong><strong></strong></p>
<p>a) It shall be unlawful for any Corporation to engage in the transportation of coal through the City of Bellingham, whether by road or railway.  For purposes of this Section 4, a Corporation will be considered to be “engaged in the transportation of coal” if it transports coal through Bellingham, or if it owns coal being transported through Bellingham.</p>
<p>b) Corporations in violation of the prohibition against engaging in coal transportation or seeking to engage in actions that would violate such prohibition shall be deemed not to possess rights as legal “persons” under the United States and Washington             Constitutions, and shall not be deemed to possess any other constitutional rights.</p>
<p>c) Corporations engaged in the transportation of coal through the City of Bellingham shall not possess the authority or power to enforce State or federal preemptive law against the people of the City of Bellingham or to challenge or overturn municipal ordinances, when that enforcement or challenge interferes with the rights asserted by this ordinance or interferes with the authority of the municipality to protect the health, safety, and welfare of its residents.</p>
<p>d) No permit, license, privilege or charter issued by any instrumentality of a state or the federal government or any international body, any commission, or any municipality to any person or any Corporation, or any director, officer, owner, or manager of a Corporation, which would violate the prohibitions of this Ordinance or deprive any Bellingham resident(s), natural community, or ecosystem of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by this Ordinance, the Washington Constitution, the United States Constitution, or other laws, shall be deemed valid within the City of Bellingham.</p>
<p>Section 5<strong>—</strong>Enforcement</p>
<p>(a) The City of Bellingham may enforce this Ordinance through an action for damages and/or in equity brought in a court of competent jurisdiction. In such an action, the City shall be entitled to recover all costs of litigation, including, without limitation, expert and attorney’s fees.</p>
<p>(b) Any resident or residents of the City of Bellingham shall have the authority to enforce this Ordinance through an action for damages and/or in equity brought in a court of competent jurisdiction. In such an action, the resident shall be entitled to recover all costs of litigation, including, without limitation, expert and attorney’s fees.</p>
<p>(c) Any action brought to remedy the violation of the rights of natural communities or ecosystems shall list the natural community or ecosystem as a plaintiff in the action, damages sought must bear a relationship to the damage inflicted upon the natural community or ecosystem, and awarded damages must be payable to the municipality for the restricted use of repairing the natural community or ecosystem.</p>
<p>(d) Right to Know. Any corporation planning to engage in activities that may be prohibited by this ordinance shall disclose those activities to the City of Bellingham at least sixty (60) days prior to engaging in those activities. That disclosure, which shall be provided in writing to the City of Bellingham, shall explain why the proposed activities do not violate the provisions of this ordinance. Upon written request of a resident or residents or of the City, any corporation engaging in one or more of the activities described in Section 4 a) will disclose such information concerning such activities as such written request shall have specified, such disclosure to occur within 30 days of the date of the request. For purposes of this Section 5 d), “resident” includes a non-profit corporation controlled by one or more human residents of the City.</p>
<p>Section 6<strong>—</strong>Effective Date and Existing Permitholders</p>
<p>This Ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after the date of its enactment, at which point the Ordinance shall apply in accordance with its terms regardless of the date of any applicable state or federal permits.</p>
<p>Section 7<strong>—People’s Right to Self</strong>-Government</p>
<p>The foundation for the making and adoption of this law is the people’s fundamental and  inalienable right to govern themselves, and thereby secure their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If other units or levels of government attempt to preempt, amend, alter, or overturn this Ordinance, or parts of this Ordinance, the Bellingham City Council shall hold public meetings that explore the adoption of other measures that provide for adequate local control and the ability of residents to protect their fundamental and inalienable right to self-government, including without limitation the amendment of the City Charter.</p>
<p>Section 8 <strong>–</strong> State and Federal Law</p>
<p>By the adoption of this local Bill of Rights by this municipality, the people call for changes to state and federal law that would result in the recognition of a fundamental and  inalienable right to community self-government free of corporate control throughout this State and the United States. The people also declare their support for changes to state and federal law that would eliminate corporate constitutional rights and powers that currently interfere with, and prevent, the exercise of local self-governance. Those rights and powers include corporate authority to preempt community lawmaking, the “right” to obtain permits or licenses contrary to local law-making, corporate “rights” as “persons” under the State and federal constitutions, and other corporate “rights” under the State and federal constitutions.</p>
<p>Section 9<strong>—</strong>Severability</p>
<p>The provisions of this Ordinance are severable. If any court of competent jurisdiction decides that any section, clause, sentence, part, or provision of this Ordinance is illegal, invalid, or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect, impair, or invalidate any of the remaining sections, clauses, sentences, parts, or provisions of the Ordinance. The people of the City of Bellingham hereby declare that in the event of such a decision, and the determination that the court’s ruling is legitimate, they would have enacted this Ordinance even without the section, clause, sentence, part, or provision that the court decides is illegal, invalid, or unconstitutional.</p>
<p>Section 10—Repealer</p>
<p>All inconsistent provisions of prior Ordinances adopted by the City of Bellingham are hereby repealed, but only to the extent necessary to remedy the inconsistency.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>P.S. from the editors:</p>
<p>See the Bellingham Herald Article:<a href="http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2011/12/29/2329380/activists-plan-initiative-to-outlaw.html">http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2011/12/29/2329380/activists-plan-initiative-to-outlaw.html</a></p>
<p>The Coal Free Bellingham website: <a href="http://coal-free-bellingham.org/">http://coal-free-bellingham.org/</a></p>
<p>via: <a href="http://readthedirt.org/2012/01/27/bellingham-rights-based-ordinance-proposed-to-stop-coal-trains/" target="_blank">http://readthedirt.org/2012/01/27/bellingham-rights-based-ordinance-proposed-to-stop-coal-trains/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/02/bellingham-wa-rights-based-ordinance-proposed-to-stop-coal-trains/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tethys Raw Materials Import and Product Export Chart</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/tethys-raw-materials-import-and-product-export-chart/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/tethys-raw-materials-import-and-product-export-chart/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:18:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>deadlyvine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Report]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resources]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/?p=3297</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/01/Tethys-Chart-4-mgd-with-acronyms-references.pdf"></a></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/01/Tethys-Chart-4-mgd-with-acronyms-references.pdf">Click for PDF version of Chart</a></p> ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/01/Tethys-Chart-4-mgd-with-acronyms-references.pdf"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-3298" title="Tethys-Chart" src="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/01/Tethys-Chart.jpg" alt="" width="422" height="540" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/files/2012/01/Tethys-Chart-4-mgd-with-acronyms-references.pdf">Click for PDF version of Chart</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/tethys-raw-materials-import-and-product-export-chart/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Bottled Life&#8221;, A New Documentary Film</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/bottled-life-a-new-documentary-film/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/bottled-life-a-new-documentary-film/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 19:42:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Nestlé]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resources]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bottled water]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nestle]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/bottled-life-a-new-documentary-film/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>DW4L has not yet had the chance to view this film, but it is a documentary about Nestle&#8217;s business of bottling water.</p> <p>Here is a link to information about the film: <a href="http://www.bottledlifefilm.com/index.php/nestle-and-water.html" target="_blank">http://www.bottledlifefilm.com/index.php/nestle-and-water.html</a></p> <p>If you watch it, please write a review by selecting &#8220;comment&#8221; below this post.  Thanks!</p> ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DW4L has not yet had the chance to view this film, but it is a documentary about Nestle&#8217;s business of bottling water.</p>
<p>Here is a link to information about the film: <a href="http://www.bottledlifefilm.com/index.php/nestle-and-water.html" target="_blank">http://www.bottledlifefilm.com/index.php/nestle-and-water.html</a></p>
<p>If you watch it, please write a review by selecting &#8220;comment&#8221; below this post.  Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/bottled-life-a-new-documentary-film/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Portland council throws its weight behind ‘corporate personhood’ abolishment</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/portland-council-throws-its-weight-behind-corporate-personhood-abolishment/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/portland-council-throws-its-weight-behind-corporate-personhood-abolishment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 19:22:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Community Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/portland-council-throws-its-weight-behind-corporate-personhood-abolishment/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By <a title="Posts by Seth Koenig" href="http://bangordailynews.com/author/skoenig/">Seth Koenig</a>, BDN Staff Posted Jan. 18, 2012 <p>PORTLAND, Maine — By a 6-2 vote Wednesday night, the Portland City Council joined Los Angeles and New York City councils in a thus far symbolic effort to strip corporations of First Amendment free speech rights controversially cemented by the U.S. Supreme Court.</p> <p>A local resolution supporting a constitutional amendment abolishing “corporate personhood” initially was proposed by Councilor David Marshall and co-sponsored by John Anton, Kevin Donoghue and [...]<p align="right">Continue reading <a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/portland-council-throws-its-weight-behind-corporate-personhood-abolishment/">Portland council throws its weight behind ‘corporate personhood’ abolishment</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>By <a title="Posts by Seth Koenig" href="http://bangordailynews.com/author/skoenig/">Seth Koenig</a>, BDN Staff</div>
<div>Posted Jan. 18, 2012</div>
<div>
<p>PORTLAND, Maine — By a 6-2 vote Wednesday night, the Portland City Council joined Los Angeles and New York City councils in a thus far symbolic effort to strip corporations of First Amendment free speech rights controversially cemented by the U.S. Supreme Court.</p>
<p>A local resolution supporting a constitutional amendment abolishing “corporate personhood” initially was proposed by Councilor David Marshall and co-sponsored by John Anton, Kevin Donoghue and Mayor Michael Brennan. The move was hailed by some councilors and several members of the public as an early step in a grass-roots push to overturn a ruling they argued opens the door to unchecked political spending by wealthy corporations.</p>
<p>The council’s vote was received with an eruption of applause and celebration by the packed council chambers after audience members spent nearly two hours testifying almost entirely in favor of the measure.</p>
<p>“We’re seeing a vast outpouring of money that is taking over our democracy,” Malory Shaughnessy, a Portland resident and former Cumberland County commissioner, told the council. “This will be the defining issue of our time, in my opinion.”</p>
<p>The U.S. Supreme Court in 2010 ruled by a 5-4 vote that limiting corporate or union political contributions equates to an infringement of the groups’ First Amendment right to free speech. The divisive decision, in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, helped usher in a new era of super PACS — political action groups that can raise and expend unlimited funds in support of candidates or issues often without disclosing donors until after elections take place.</p>
<p>Because the issue already has been appealed to the highest court in the country, the only way to throw out corporate personhood now would be a constitutional amendment. That prospective step has received votes of support from several municipal council and boards across the country.</p>
<p>During the Portland council’s turn to weigh in Wednesday, several members of the public, many from the nearby <a href="http://bangordailynews.com/2011/12/19/news/portland/occupymaine-takes-tussle-with-portland-to-court/">OccupyMaine</a> encampment and the Maine League of Young Voters, told councilors the local resolution would be a small but important victory in the movement against the court ruling.</p>
<p>The Portland meeting was a preview of sorts to a Friday demonstration planned by OccupyMaine to take place at the U.S. District Court in the city, where protesters plan to show solidarity with other occupations around the nation marking the second anniversary of the Citizens United decision with a ceremonial “funeral for democracy.”</p>
<p>“Corporations do not have the same interests as you and I, as the average Mainer or the average Portland resident,” said Adam Marletta, chairman of the Portland Green Independent party. “All of this corporate money tends to drown out the voices of the average citizens.”</p>
<p>Not everybody on the council approved of the resolution, however. Councilor John Coyne<strong> </strong>joined Cheryl Leeman in voting against the measure, the latter of whom argued that U.S. constitutional interpretation is not a job for the City Council.</p>
<p>Leeman suggested discussing the issue during a council meeting detracts from the panel’s ability to deal with more appropriate city business.</p>
<p>“I do on one hand feel that what you’ve said and what you’ve brought forward is an important issue,” Leeman said to the audience Wednesday. “Where I part ways with all of you is I just quite simply don’t believe this is the forum to do this.”</p>
<p>Voting in favor of the resolution were Councilors Nicholas Mavodones and Jill Duson, in addition to sponsors Marshall, Anton, Donoghue and Brennan. Councilor Ed Suslovic left the meeting before the vote because of an ailing back, but before leaving, he called for his fellow councilors to consider placing the issue before the council’s Legislative Committee to develop an amendment establishing a municipal-level Clean Elections program.</p>
<p>Brennan said that as a former state lawmaker and Democratic candidate for the Congress, he has seen firsthand the influence of money on campaigning and that Maine’s Clean Elections law has been a trendsetter for minimizing that influence.</p>
<p>via: <a href="http://bangordailynews.com/2012/01/18/news/portland/portland-council-throws-its-weight-behind-corporate-personhood-abolishment/?ref=latest" target="_blank">http://bangordailynews.com/2012/01/18/news/portland/portland-council-throws-its-weight-behind-corporate-personhood-abolishment/?ref=latest</a></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/portland-council-throws-its-weight-behind-corporate-personhood-abolishment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Project Pours Water into Volcano to Make Power</title>
		<link>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/project-pours-water-into-volcano-to-make-power/</link>
		<comments>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/project-pours-water-into-volcano-to-make-power/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:39:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>chris</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oregon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/project-pours-water-into-volcano-to-make-power/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ <p>Defending Water for Life asks, &#8220;Where is this water coming from?&#8221;  Also, it seems a little dangerous to us that a likely side effect is earthquakes.  Whether it&#8217;s a rural area or not&#8230;</p> by weather.com and The Associated Press Geothermal energy developers plan to pump 24 million gallons of water into the side of the dormant Central Oregon volcano this summer to demonstrate new technology they hope will give a boost to a green energy sector that has yet to [...]<p align="right">Continue reading <a href="http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/project-pours-water-into-volcano-to-make-power/">Project Pours Water into Volcano to Make Power</a></p>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<p>Defending Water for Life asks, &#8220;Where is this water coming from?&#8221;  Also, it seems a little dangerous to us that a likely side effect is earthquakes.  Whether it&#8217;s a rural area or not&#8230;</p>
<h2>by weather.com and The Associated Press</h2>
</div>
<div>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="right">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="277"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top" bgcolor="#f5f5f5" width="277"><img src="http://i.imwx.com/web/news/2012/january/wilson-11412-277x187.jpg" alt="" /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3" valign="top" bgcolor="#f5f5f5" width="277">
<div>Geothermal energy developers plan to pump 24 million gallons of water into the side of the dormant Central Oregon volcano this summer to demonstrate new technology they hope will give a boost to a green energy sector that has yet to live up to its promise. (AP Photo/Don Ryan)</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="3"></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Geothermal energy developers plan to pump 24 million gallons of water into the side of a dormant volcano in Central Oregon this summer to demonstrate new technology they hope will give a boost to a green energy sector that has yet to live up to its promise.</p>
<p>They hope the water comes back to the surface fast enough and hot enough to create cheap, clean electricity that isn&#8217;t dependent on sunny skies or stiff breezes &#8211; without shaking the earth and rattling the nerves of nearby residents.</p>
<p>Renewable energy has been held back by cheap natural gas, weak demand for power and waning political concern over global warming. Efforts to use the earth&#8217;s heat to generate power, known as geothermal energy, have been further hampered by technical problems and worries that tapping it can cause earthquakes.</p>
<p>Even so, the federal government, Google and other investors are interested enough to bet $43 million on the Oregon project. They are helping AltaRock Energy, Inc. of Seattle and Davenport Newberry Holdings LLC of Stamford, Conn., demonstrate whether the next level in geothermal power development can work on the flanks of Newberrry Volcano, located about 20 miles south of Bend, Ore.</p>
<p>&#8220;We know the heat is there,&#8221; said Susan Petty, president of AltaRock. &#8220;The big issue is can we circulate enough water through the system to make it economic.&#8221;</p>
<p>The heat in the earth&#8217;s crust has been used to generate power for more than a century. Engineers gather hot water or steam that bubbles near the surface and use it to spin a turbine that creates electricity. Most of those areas have been exploited. The new frontier is places with hot rocks, but no cracks in the rocks or water to deliver the steam.</p>
<p>To tap that heat &#8211; and grow geothermal energy from a tiny niche into an important source of green energy &#8211; engineers are working on a new technology called Enhanced Geothermal Systems.</p>
<p>&#8220;To build geothermal in a big way beyond where it is now requires new technology, and that is where EGS comes in,&#8221; said Steve Hickman, a research geophysicist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park, Calif.</p>
<p>Wells are drilled deep into the rock and water is pumped in, creating tiny fractures in the rock, a process known as hydroshearing.</p>
<p>Cold water is pumped down production wells into the reservoir, and the steam is drawn out.</p>
<p>Hydroshearing is similar to the process known as hydraulic fracturing, used to free natural gas from shale formations. But fracking uses chemical-laden fluids, and creates huge fractures. Pumping fracking wastewater deep underground for disposal likely led to recent earthquakes in Arkansas and Ohio.</p>
<p>Fears persist that cracking rock deep underground through hydroshearing can also lead to damaging quakes. EGS has other problems. It is hard to create a reservoir big enough to run a commercial power plant.</p>
<p>Progress has been slow. Two small plants are online in France and Germany. A third in downtown Basel, Switzerland, was shut down over earthquake complaints. A project in Australia has had drilling problems.</p>
<p>A new international protocol is coming out at the end of this month that urges EGS developers to keep projects out of urban areas, the so-called &#8220;sanity test,&#8221; said Ernie Majer, a seismologist with the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. It also urges developers to be upfront with local residents so they know exactly what is going on.</p>
<p>AltaRock hopes to demonstrate a new technology for creating bigger reservoirs that is based on the plastic polymers used to make biodegradable cups.</p>
<p>It worked in existing geothermal fields. Newberry will show if it works in a brand new EGS field, and in a different kind of geology, volcanic rock, said Colin Williams, a USGS geophysicist also in Menlo Park.</p>
<p>The U.S. Department of Energy has given the project $21.5 million in stimulus funds. That has been matched by private investors, among them Google with $6.3 million.</p>
<p>Majer said the danger of a major quake at Newbery is very low. The area is a kind of seismic dead zone, with no significant faults. It is far enough from population centers to make property damage unlikely. And the layers of volcanic ash built up over millennia dampen any shaking.</p>
<p>But the Department of Energy will be keeping a close eye on the project, and any significant quakes would shut it down at least temporarily, he said. The agency is also monitoring EGS projects at existing geothermal fields in California, Nevada and Idaho.</p>
<p>&#8220;That&#8217;s the $64,000 question,&#8221; Majer said. &#8220;What&#8217;s the biggest earthquake we can have from induced seismicity that the public can worry about.&#8221;</p>
<p>Geologists believe Newberry Volcano was once one of the tallest peaks in the Cascades, reaching an elevation of 10,000 feet and a diameter of 20 miles. It blew its top before the last Ice Age, leaving a caldera studded with towering lava flows, two lakes, and 400 cinder cones, some 400 feet tall.</p>
<p>Although the volcano has not erupted in 1,300 years, hot rocks close to the surface drew exploratory wells in the 1980s.</p>
<p>Over 21 days, AltaRock will pour 800 gallons of water per minute into the 10,600-foot test well, already drilled, for a total of 24 million gallons. According to plan, the cold water cracks the rock. The tiny plastic particles pumped down the well seal off the cracks. Then more cold water goes in, bypassing the first tier, and cracking the rock deeper in the well. That tier is sealed off, and cold water cracks a third section. Later, the plastic melts away.</p>
<p>Seismic sensors produce detailed maps of the fracturing, expected to produce a reservoir of cracks starting about 6,000 feet below the surface, and extending to 11,000 feet. It would be about 3,300 feet in diameter.</p>
<p>The U.S. Bureau of Land Management released an environmental assessment of the Newberry project last month that does not foresee any problems that would stop it. The agency is taking public comments before making a final decision in coming months.</p>
<p>No power plant is proposed, but one could be operating in about 10 years, said Doug Perry, president and CEO of Davenport Newberry.</p>
<p>EGS is attractive because it vastly expands the potential for geothermal power, which, unlike wind and solar, produces power around the clock in any weather.</p>
<p>Natural geothermal resources account for about 0.3 percent of U.S. electricity production, but a 2007 Massachusetts Institute of Technology report projected EGS could bump that to 10 percent within 50 years, at prices competitive with fossil-fuels.</p>
<p>Few people expect that kind of timetable now. Electricity prices have fallen sharply because of low natural gas prices and weak demand brought about by the Great Recession and state efficiency programs.</p>
<p>But the resource is vast. A 2008 USGS assessment found EGS throughout the West, where hot rocks are closer to the surface than in the East, has the potential to produce half the country&#8217;s electricity.</p>
<p>&#8220;The important question we need to answer now,&#8221; said Williams, the USGS geophysicist who compiled the assessment, &#8220;is how geothermal fits into the renewable energy picture, and how EGS fits. How much it is going to cost, and how much is available.&#8221;</p>
</div>
<p>via <a href="http://beta.weather.com/outlook/weather-news/news/articles/volcano-water-project_2012-01-14" target="_blank">http://beta.weather.com/outlook/weather-news/news/articles/volcano-water-project_2012-01-14</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://defendingwater.net/washington/2012/01/project-pours-water-into-volcano-to-make-power/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

