John Kerry in This Moment on Earth
On Corporations:
Industry-sponsored chem safety research leaves US behind
A profound shift in the chemical-management paradigm has been adopted by the European Union (EU), where chemical producers are now required to provide authorities and the public with toxicity data on all high-volume chemicals. It is simply common sense:
Before you release something into the environment, you must tell us about its health and environmental effects. Japan has banned the use of some phthalates in toys, and soon, certain phthalates will be permanently banned from use in all toys in Europe.We also need to question whether industry-sponsored research will provide the sort of independent information required.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p. 42-4
Jan 1, 2007
On Corporations:
Precautionary Principle: producers must prove harmlessness
The precautionary principle--which is being adopted in many places outside of the US, including the European Union--is based on this very simple and logical idea: The burden should be on the manufacturer to prove that the chemicals they sell do not have
harmful effects, rather than on the consumer to prove that they do. It is certainly the wisest, cheapest, and best approach to the toxic dilemma. Manufacturers should not sell products to us until we have proof that they will not harm us. Period. As the
world's leading industrial nation, the US must embrace this practice.Convincing elected officials of the harmful effects of toxic substances can be difficult in part because the manufacturers are working hard to convince them otherwise.
We must not
allow our bodies to be used as part of an uncontrolled experiment without our knowledge and without our consent. And we do not need to quietly accept the presence of industrial and synthetic chemicals as a necessary condition of living in today's world.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p. 48-9
Jan 1, 2007
On Energy & Oil:
Global Warming as “hoax” is funded by Big Oil & GOP
Big oil & their Republican allies in Congress have gone to great lengths to both muddle the facts & stifle efforts to address climate change. Oil companies have given money to advocacy organizations that deny the science behind global warming theory &
have taken out full-page ads in major newspapers questioning the role of man-made emissions in climate change. When Americans see ads like that, and hear their leaders claiming that climate change is a “hoax,” no wonder we are one of the few nations that
have not wholeheartedly embraced both the science & the urgent need to act.Here is the reality of global climate change. At both poles & nearly all points in between, the temperature of Earth’s surface is heating up. Nearly every researcher
professionally engaged in the study of climate change, from across the political and ideological spectrum, agrees that the increased concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by human activity is responsible for the current warming trend
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p.119-122
Jan 1, 2007
On Energy & Oil:
Global warming as "hoax" is funded by Big Oil and GOP
Efforts have been well supported by big oil and their Republican allies in Congress. For more than a decade, ExxonMobil has gone to great lengths to both muddle the facts and stifle efforts to address climate change. Oil companies have given money to
advocacy organizations that deny the science behind global warming theory and have even taken out full-page ads in major newspapers questioning the role of man-made emissions in climate change. When Americans can pick up a paper and see an ad like that,
and hear their leaders in Washington claiming that climate change is a "hoax," no wonder we are one of the few nations that have not wholeheartedly embraced both the science and the urgent need to act.Today, in fact, nearly every researcher
professionally engaged in the study of climate change, from across the political and ideological spectrum, agrees that the increased concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by human activity is responsible for the current warming trend
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p.119-22
Jan 1, 2007
On Energy & Oil:
Senate rejection of Kyoto was to renegotiate, not ignore it
In 1997 the Senate [debated the Kyoto Protocol on] the issue of excluding developing countries from CO2 reductions. India and China were about to become significant enough as industrial powers that to exempt them entirely from the Kyoto Protocol would be
a mistake--which convinced every member of the Senate that the US should not ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Rather, the Senate unanimously passed the Byrd-Hagel Resolution, which cautioned the US from agreeing to binding emissions reductions while less
developed nations could grow with whatever practices they chose, and with no responsibility to meet any particular standard. Some people interpret the Byrd-Hagel Resolution as an objection to any mandatory controls on emissions, but that's not the case.
In fact, the resolution called for the treaty's renegotiation, not for the issue to be ignored. In one respect in particular, the resolution had particularly damaging consequences: It seeded the idea of American reluctance to lead on this vital issue.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p.141-2
Jan 1, 2007
On Energy & Oil:
We cannot drill our way to energy independence
Although we all cheered in early 2006 when President Bush finally acknowledged that our country was "addicted" to oil, and although his administration has grudgingly gone along with some small investments in pursuing alternative energy sources, its
primary energy policy thrust has been to set America on a course toward even greater addiction to oil and other fossil fuels. The administration has been operating on the bizarre assumption that we can drill our way to energy independence.
Exploring and extracting fossil fuel is a necessary part of our energy mix. We will be drilling and exploiting these resources for years to come, but we must take into account its true cost and the damage it will cause, the
true cost of the investment and the alternatives available. Casualties of the drilling frenzy that ignore these costs are increasingly scattered across the American landscape.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p.152-3
Jan 1, 2007
On Energy & Oil:
Clean coal is only OK if we sequester tons of CO2
If we want to burn the plentiful stock of US coal, we first have to find a way to strictly limit the amount of carbon dioxide released in the process. If we fail, we have little chance of gaining control over global warming.Techniques have been
developed--called CO2 capture and storage (CCS) or geologic carbon sequestration--in which most of the carbon dioxide produced at power plants is not released into the atmosphere but is captured and then stored deep underground.
The International Panel on Climate Change estimated in 2005 that it is "highly probable that geologic media worldwide are capable of sequestering at least 2 trillion metric tons of CO2--more than is likely to be produced by fossil-fuel-consuming plants
during the 21st century." With at least 114 new coal-burning power plants currently in the building or permitting stages around the country, we have no time to waste in requiring an immediate and significant reduction in carbon emissions from coal plants
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p.184
Jan 1, 2007
On Energy & Oil:
Dismiss nuclear power until weapons & waste are resolved
Nuclear energy is carbon free, and it is also available. That is the case for considering it.If the clean energy options were properly developed and exploited, nuclear power would not be necessary. In the mad rush to embrace nuclear power, however,
we cannot forget the three big counts against it:
- it is more expensive than new coal- or gas-powered plants;
- global expansion of nuclear power raises concerns that radioactive nuclear weapons ambitions may inadvertently be advanced; and
- no one has yet resolved the issue of how to handle the radioactive nuclear waste that results from the process, which will be around for thousands of years.
Although it cannot be dismissed as
part of the energy solution and our response to the threat of global climate change, until the 3 big hurdles are adequately addressed, nuclear energy does not offer a sound vision for the long-term future.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p.186
Jan 1, 2007
On Energy & Oil:
Legislation to reduce CO2 emissions by 2050
Senator Olympia J. Snowe and I have introduced the most aggressive, bipartisan legislation yet put before Congress to slow, stop, and reverse greenhouse gas emissions.
Our plan sets greenhouse gas emissions targets that science suggests keep temperatures below the danger point. The level of emissions is frozen in 2010 and then gradually declines each year to 65% below 2000 emissions levels by 2056.
The bill achieves these targets through a flexible, economy-wide cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gas emissions.
It includes measures to advance technology and reduce emissions through clean, renewable energy and energy efficiency in the transportation, industrial and residential sectors.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John Kerry, p.205
Jan 1, 2007
On Environment:
Consumer convenience costs the planet a price
The most ordinary items of our daily life are worth reevaluating in light of our precarious relationship with the Earth. Even something as simple as, say, a baby's diaper.The disposable diaper was convenient and gave millions of American parents a
new sense of freedom. But what did the introduction of the disposable diaper mean for the planet? Diapers are now the 3rd-largest single contributor to solid waste at landfills, where they may take as long as 500 years to biodegrade.
The same can be said of most of the products we make and use today. Even today, few manufacturers or consumers are concerned about what happens to something once they have thrown it away.
The manufacturers and consumers of these products did not set
out to create vast amounts of waste, fill our landfills, or poison our land. But, nevertheless, the planet has paid the price for our convenience. Now is the time when we have to confront a crucial question: If that is not our intention, then what is?
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p. 8-10
Jan 1, 2007
On Environment:
EPA limits on mercury emissions made sense
We know that coal-fired power plants release a mix of toxic chemicals, including mercury, into the atmosphere, and that, spewed through the smokestacks, it eventually settles in lakes, rivers & oceans. We also know that mercury is a dangerous neurotoxin
to humans, especially fetuses & children.The connection is very clear: Out-of-date, low-tech, coal-powered plants can gravely injure children & adults alike, even miles and states beyond where they are located. But we know something else. Controlling
mercury emissions from power plants--especially our oldest and dirtiest power plants--can result in reduced mercury levels.
[In 2001, Bush & the GOP overturned] the Clinton rule on reducing mercury emissions, and in its place the president proposed
a policy allowing power plants to emit more than 3 times as much mercury than under existing law. An EPA analysis noted that this revision to the act allowed more than 100 power plants to actually INCREASE mercury emissions.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p. 53-4
Jan 1, 2007
On Environment:
Minority communities more likely polluted than white areas
While all Americans are at risk of suffering the ill-effects of air pollution--and all pollution--not all are suffering equally. In the US, poor & minority Americans have a much greater chance of becoming ill from environmental toxins because they have a
greater chance of living near a polluting industry than do white, wealthier Americans.A 2005 investigation found that people of color were 79% more likely than whites to reside in communities where pollution posed the highest health risks. In the most
polluted areas, 1 of every 6 people lived in poverty.
The practice of local governments encouraging the placement of noxious industries in poor neighborhoods goes back to the early part of the 20th century, where minority communities were zoned
as “industrial” while white communities were zoned “residential.” The trend continues today. Poor & ethnic communities are often assumed to be politically powerless & therefore are targeted wen it comes time to locate a new power plant or toxic dump.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p. 59-60
Jan 1, 2007
On Environment:
Minority communities more likely polluted than white areas
While all Americans are at risk of suffering the ill effects of air pollution, not all are suffering equally. In the US, poor & minority Americans have a much greater chance of becoming ill from environmental toxins because they have a greater chance of
living near a polluting industry, and living with highly polluted air, than do white, wealthier Americans. A 2005 investigation found that people of color were 79% more likely than whites to reside in communities where pollution posed the highest health
risks (in 1996, that number was 49%). The average annual income in the most polluted areas was just $18,806, and one of every 6 people lived in poverty.The practice of local governments encouraging the placement of noxious industries in poor
neighborhoods goes back to the early 20th century. The trend continues today. Poor and ethnic communities are often assumed to be politically powerless and therefore are targeted when it comes time to locate a new power plant or other polluting facility.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p. 59-60
Jan 1, 2007
On Environment:
CWA is bedrock protection; but today it's in decline
The Clean Water Act [and other environmental legislation passed after the first Earth Day in 1970] remain the bedrock protection for our environment: If anything, their relevance and value have increased in the quarter century since they were passed.
Despite the achievements of the Clean Water Act, today, for the first time since its passage, water quality has begun to decline. Today's water pollution is different but no less damaging than the water pollution that occurred in the past. It stems
primarily from what are called "non-point sources." Pollution is no longer usually caused by a direct release from one point of origin, such as a pipe from an industrial operation. Instead, pollutants are carried to our bodies of water indirectly & from
many different sources--including our own backyards.
Most water pollution today, however, can be directly linked to agricultural practices. Pesticides & manure are frequently washed [away] by rain, contributing 60% of the pollutants in our water today.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John & Teresa Kerry, p. 88-90
Jan 1, 2007
On Environment:
Live by "Precautionary Principle": first, do no harm
The challenge is clear and compelling. Climate change is threatening the planet, life, and land due to human-made greenhouse gases. Fish are dying in water polluted with pesticide, chemical, and animal waste.
Minority communities continue to be victimized by unwanted toxic waste dumps and dirty power plants. We are paying an extraordinary price for our unwillingness to live by the precautionary principle other nations have adopted:
First, do no harm. But common sense can prevail, and Americans in every state are making a collective statement about right and wrong:
It is right to take precautions against scientifically predicted disaster; it is wrong to suffer disease and danger because polluters are allowed to call the shots.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John Kerry, p.197-198
Jan 1, 2007
On Environment:
New environmentalists motivated by personal stewardship
The new environmentalism reflects our culture, our beliefs as a people, and our best instincts as individuals. As we learn through the stories here, today's best "environmentalists" are often people who are motivated not by ideology or membership in
particular organizations or causes, but by a simple sense of personal responsibility as stewards of our planet. Indeed, they feel morally compelled to take action, and their example should inspire the rest of us to live out our own beliefs as well.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John Kerry, p.199
Jan 1, 2007
On Homeland Security:
We must break our oil addiction to win War on Terror
We cannot win the war on terror and get serious about global climate change and energy security, if we do not take bold steps to actually break our oil addiction. Talk is not enough. A safer, more secure energy future is well within our reach.
The imperative has never been greater to reshape the future of our energy supply and energy use.
- We must establish an oil savings goal and implement an aggressive set of policies to reach it.
- We must immediately expand the availability of renewable fuels to run our automobiles.
-
And we need to get serious about climate change and take measures to freeze and reverse our greenhouse gas emissions.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John Kerry, p.204-205
Jan 1, 2007
On Technology:
Technological advances make environmental progress cheap
Naysayers have argued that meeting environmental challenges is too difficult or expensive; too complicated and divisive. But those arguments ignore recent history, not to mention the stunning tradition of American achievement. In the early 1990s,
Congress set out to renew the Clean Air Act, providing the first real opportunity to address acid rain at the national level. There was the inevitable tug-of-war between the power industry and the environmentalists. The environmental community argued it
would take half the time at half the cost [than industry estimates].Guess what? They were both wrong. It took half the money the ENVIRONMENTALISTS had predicted to achieve better air quality standards. Why? Because no one could anticipate the scale
of technological advances achieved once the decision was made and goals were set. The lessons learned? Don't listen to those who counsel despair and never underestimate the ingenuity of our scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John Kerry, p.198
Jan 1, 2007
On Technology:
$3B in tax credits to spur hybrid vehicle development
Flexible fuel vehicles can run on higher blends of ethanol, which helps displace petroleum. I propose that by 2020, 100% of our vehicles should be capable of running on flex fuels. Unless US automakers move faster to build hybrids, thousands of jobs
could be lost. Producing fuel-efficient, advanced-technology vehicles will require automobiles and their suppliers to retool their factories. Hybrid vehicles rely on advanced equipment such as battery packs, electric motors and generators,
and electronic power controllers--components that currently come from factories in Japan and Europe. Tax credits will help manufacturers make capital investments necessary to retool their factories, increase the cost-effectiveness of advanced
technologies, and stimulate job growth in the production of cleaner, more efficient vehicles. We must provide a total of $3 billion over the next 5 years in consumer and manufacturer tax credits to spur these changes.
Source: This Moment On Earth, by John Kerry, p.208
Jan 1, 2007
Page last updated: Feb 18, 2019