8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 1/16
FRIENDS EARTHOF
THE
www.foe.org | Volume 35, Number 3 | Fall 2005 N E W S M A G A Z I N E
Chemical Weapons
The Secret Time Bomb
Mountain Gorillas
on the Brink
Shell Oil Project
Threatens Wildlife
CFC
#0908
Is Nuclear PowerMaking a Comeback?
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 1
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 2/16
FRIENDS OF THE EARTH extends our
deepest sympathies to the victims of
Hurricane Katrina. Hundreds of
thousands of people continue to
experience numerous hardships in
the aftermath of the hurricane. As
we move forward, it is critical that
we learn from past mistakes.
The channeling of the Mississippi
River from its natural course coupled
with rampant oil and gas exploration
in Louisiana have radically under-
mined wetlands.This has created
environmental conditions for hurri-cane destruction that were most
dangerous for the least powerful.
Indeed, this disaster is the most
devastating example of environmen-
tal injustice ever experienced in the
United States. The inundation of
New Orleans and the resulting
human misery have laid bare the
unsettling links between human
inequity and the environment
around us.
For 36 years,Friends of the Earth
has been working to prevent thesetypes of disasters.We have cam-
paigned against faulty flood control
projects built by the Army Corps of
Engineers and other federal agen-
cies, which have undermined the
safety of Louisiana and other Gulf
Coast residents. But standing in the
way of real reform has been the
ever-present power of the pork bar-
rel. Most water resource projects are
not approved and built based on any
merit or need; rather, they are built
because influential constituents andcampaign contributors, including
the construction lobby, want them,
and because members lack the
courage to critique projects in other
members’ districts.
Unfortunately, the problem does
not end with water projects.
Congress is handling national policy
on energy and transportation the
same way. The energy bill and the
transportation bill passed by
Congress this summer don’t repre-
sent coherent policy, but rather a
string of subsidies and handouts to
influential lobbies.
So where has this haphazard, porkbarrel-driven development taken us?
In the case of the Gulf Coast, federal
and state governments have repeat-
edly encouraged and allowed con-
struction and development in sensi-
tive areas. Taxpayer money has been
spent on projects in hazard zones,
destroying or compromising marsh-
lands,mangroves,sand dunes, and
barrier islands—all natural defenses
against storm surges. As a result, we
have more and more damage, loss of
life, tragedy and suffering.
The suffering is particularly tragic
in the case of New Orleans, where
we have witnessed the plight of poor
and minorities trapped in flood
waters. The obvious environmental
injustice of not providing faster and
more comprehensive relief is a terri-
ble commentary on the values of the
Bush administration.
As the science of climate change
has become more precise in recent
years,the latest research indicates
that the intensity of hurricanes is
growing. An MIT study this year sug-
gests a dramatic increase in hurricane
intensity in the last 30 years. Global
warming may well be bringing us
stronger hurricanes as well as many
other kinds of violent weather events.We must address our nation’s
global warming emissions, as well as
return critical coastal areas to their
natural state. Unfortunately,
President Bush has failed at a
national level to push energy legisla-
tion that would put the country on
track for a clean energy future.
Instead, Bush has spearheaded legis-
lation that subsidizes nuclear power.
As the cover story of this issue
details,wind power stands in stark
contrast to the environmental andpublic health threats posed by an
increase in the use of nuclear power.
I concluded my summer vacation
with a tour of wind development in
western New York State and Kansas.
While Congress has doled out billions
to the nuclear industry with the sign-
ing of the energy bill,wind energy is
quietly emerging as power source
that is both affordable and clean.
It is critical that we reduce our
global warming emissions to stem
the tide of severe weather eventsand the other adverse impacts of
rapid climate change. Now is the
time to demand that our leaders act.
P R E S I D E N T ’ S C O L U M N ■
2 Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine | Fall 2005
Hurricane Damage HighlightsEnvironmental Injustice in the Gulf
Brent Blackwelder, President
p
hotocredit:LisaMatthes
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 2
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 3/16
Fall 2005 | Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine 3
C O N T E N T S ■
Friends of the Earth (ISSN:1054-1829) is published quarterly by Friends of the Earth, 1717 Massachusetts Ave.,NW, Suite600,Washington, DC 20036-2008,phone 202-783-7400, fax 202-783-0444, e-mail:[emailprotected], website:www.foe.org.Annual membership dues are $25, which include a subscription to Friends of the Earth. The words “Friends of theEarth”and the FoE logo are exclusive trademarks of Friends of the Earth, all rights reserved. Requests to reprint articlesshould be submitted to Lisa Grob at [emailprotected] . Periodicals postage paid at Washington, DC.
Our Mission: Friends of the Earth defends the environment and champions a healthy and just world.
Board of DirectorsDan Gabel, Chair;Arlie Schardt,Vice Chair;HarriettCrosby, Secretary; David Zwick, Treasurer;WhiteyBluestein; Jayni Chase;Clarence Ditlow; Michael Herz;Ann Hoffman;Marika Holmgren;Doug Legum;Russell Long;Garrett Loube;Patricia Matthews; AvisOgilvy Moore;Charles Moore; Edwardo Lao Rhodes;
Doria Steedman;Rick Taketa;Alicia Wittink.
StaffBrent Blackwelder, PresidentNorman Dean, Executive DirectorLisa Archer,Campaigns Coordinator, Health &
Environment ProgramElizabeth Bast,International Policy AnalystRichard Bell,Media DirectorMichelle Chan-Fishel, Green Investments Project
DirectorHugh Cheatham,Chief Financial OfficerRosemary Greenaway,Director of Membership and
MarketingDavid Hirsch, Program DirectorCheryl Johnson, Receptionist/Office AssistantLisa Matthes, Executive AssistantMichelle Medeiros,Senior Campaigner, International
Financial InstitutionsChris Pabon, Director of Foundation RelationsColin Peppard, Transportation Coordinator
Erich Pica, Director, Domestic ProgramDavid Waskow,Director, International ProgramChris Weiss,Director of D.C. Environmental NetworkAnne White,Development DirectorSara Zdeb, Legislative Director
Publications StaffLisa Grob,EditorDesign by JML Design
Bluewater Network StaffMarsha Mather-Thrift, Managing DirectorDanielle Fugere, Global Warming Campaign DirectorJulie Rinard, Development CoordinatorCarl Schneebeck,Public Lands Campaign DirectorTeri Shore,Clean Vessels Director
Consultants/AdvisorsBrian Dunkiel Bill FreeseJohn W. Jensen Dorothee KrahnFred Millar
Member GroupsArgentina,Australia,Austria,Bangladesh,Belgium,Belgium (Flanders),Bolivia,Brazil,Bulgaria,Cameroon,Canada,Chile, Colombia,Costa Rica, Croatia, Curacao,Cyprus, Czech Republic,Denmark,El Salvador, England-Wales-Northern Ireland, Estonia, Finland,France,Georgia, Germany,Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala,Haiti,Honduras,Hungary, Indonesia,Ireland,Italy,Japan,Korea, Latvia,Lithuania,Luxembourg,Macedonia,Malaysia,Mali, Malta,Mauritius, Nepal,Netherlands,New Zealand,Nicaragua,Nigeria,Norway,Papua NewGuinea,Paraguay,Peru,Philippines, Poland, Scotland,Sierra Leone, Slovakia,South Africa, Spain,Sri Lanka,Swaziland,Sweden,Switzerland,Togo,Tunisia,Ukraine, United States, Uruguay.
AffiliatesAfrica:Earthlife Africa; Australia:Mineral Policy Institute; Australia:Rainforest Information Centre; Brazil:Amigos da Terra Amazonia -Amazônia Brasileira;Brazil: Grupo deTrabalho Amazonico;Canada: Blue
Planet Project;Czech Republic: CEEBankwatch;Japan: Peace Boat;MiddleEast: Friends of the Earth Middle East;
Netherlands: Action for Solidarity,Equality,Environment and Development Europe;Netherlands:Stichting De Noordzee (North Sea Foundation);Netherlands: Corporate Europe Observatory;Netherlands:Wise Europe; United States:Corpwatch;United States:International Rivers Network;UnitedStates:Rainforest Action Network
Friends of the Earth is printed with soy ink on100% recycled paper, 30% post-consumercontent.Bleached without chlorine.
Friends of
the EarthInternational
Is Nuclear PowerMaking a Comeback? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
The Secret Time Bomb– Chemical Weapons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
Campaign News. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Mountain Gorillas ofCentral Africa On the Brink . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Recipes for a Clean House . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Shell Oil ProjectThreatens Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Now is the Seasonfor Workplace Giving! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Changing of the Guard …. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
www.foe.org
Volume 35, Number 3
Fall 2005
Earth Share giving campaigns allow you to designate a donation
to Friends of the Earth. Federal employees can donate through
the Combined Federal Campaign by marking #0908 on their
pledge forms.To set up an Earth Share campaign at your work-
place,contact Rosemary Greenaway at 202-222-0722.
FRIENDS EARTHOF
THE
N E W S M A G A Z I N E
ALLIED PRINTING
TRADES COUNCIL
WASHINGTON
UNIONLABEL
98906mvpR2 10/19/05 10:42 AM Page 3
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 4/16
4 Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine | Fall 2005
C O V E R S T O R Y ■
By Elizabeth Bast, International Policy
Analyst, Friends of the Earth & Erich
Pica, Director, Economic Programs,
Friends of the Earth
FOR MORE THAN 30 YEARS, safety
concerns and the failure of the
nuclear industry to prove itself eco-
nomically viable have kept nuclear
power from expanding. No new
nuclear power plants have been
ordered in the United States since
1978. But with the help of a multi-mil-
lion dollar ad campaign and
increased political support from the
White House and Congress,the
nuclear power industry could make a
comeback – offering nuclear energyas the answer to both global warm-
ing and the nation’s growing need for
electricity.
Is Nuclear Power “Clean”?In the late 1990s, the nuclear power
industry began efforts to buy a new
reputation through misleading adver-
tising and public relations campaigns.
The industry presented nuclear power
as a clean source of energy that would
reduce greenhouse gas emissions that
lead to global warming and other air
pollution.The ads,sponsored by the
trade group Nuclear Energy Institute
(NEI),hyped nuclear power as a clean,emission-free energy source.
Environmental groups filed a com-
plaint with the Federal Trade
Commission, which ultimately ruled
that the ads were inaccurate.
Undeterred,the most recent ad cam-
paign released by NEI contains the
tag-line,“Nuclear. The Clean Air
Energy.”
Despite the marketing efforts of
the nuclear power industry, the sim-
ple reality is that nuclear power is
not clean energy. Generating nuclear
power produces radioactive waste
that must be stored and managed
for millennia, and there is still no
long-term storage system in place
for the radioactive waste we have
Is Nuclear Power
Since 1948, the
federal government
has spent $73.4
billion on research
and development
for the nuclear
power industry.
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 4
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 5/16
Fall 2005 | Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine 5
C O V E R S T O R Y ■
already produced. Radioactive mate-
rials used at nuclear power plants
still pose safety concerns,and acci-
dents at nuclear power plants are
still a serious possibility.
Construction of new plants seems
particularly inappropriate consider-
ing the heightened concern over ter-
rorist attacks in a post-9/11 world.Nor is nuclear power a solution to
global warming. According to a
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (MIT) report, it would
take the construction of more than
1000 new nuclear power plants
worldwide to significantly affect
global warming. Building nuclear
reactors on this scale would exacer-
bate safety issues and create massive
amounts of radioactive waste.
Adding to this,many new plants
would likely produce a shortage ofuranium supplies by the end of the
century, requiring the development
of another power option in the next
100 years. In addition, uranium min-
ing, milling and enrichment rely on
fossil fuels, meaning that nuclear
power production would still emit
greenhouse gases.
A recent report conducted for the
U.S. Public Interest Research Group
by Synapse Energy Economics shows
that the U.S. can substantially
reduce global warming pollutionwhile reducing its reliance on
nuclear power. The report concluded
that modest investments in energy
efficiency and renewable energy
would allow the U.S. to reduce global
warming pollution from the electric-
ity sector by 47 percent by 2025,
while saving $36 billion annually in
electricity costs and cutting U.S.
reliance on nuclear power by nearly
half.
The Numbers Still Don’t
Add UpNuclear power plants cost more
than $4 billion to construct,creating
substantial start up costs for new
plants. Since 1948, the federal gov-
ernment has spent $73.4 billion on
research and development for the
nuclear power industry. Congress
also passed the Price-Anderson Act,
which caps the liability of the
nuclear power industry at $10 billion
in the event of an accident, even
though studies conducted by the
government’s Sandia National
Laboratory identified worst case sce-
narios that could cost more than
$300 billion. Despite these govern-
ment handouts, no nuclear power
plants have been ordered since 1978,
and more than 100 reactors have
been canceled, including all ordered
after 1973.When asked in May aboutthe prospect of financing a new
nuclear power plant,Thomas Capps,
chairman of Dominion, one of the
nation’s largest producers of energy,
replied,“Standard & Poor’s and
Moody’s would have a heart attack,
and my chief financial officer would,
too.”
In spite of this, the nuclear power
industry went to Congress and the
Bush administration to seek addi-
tional federal help to change the
economic picture for nuclear power.The energy bill, passed by Congress
and signed into law by President
Bush this summer, attempts to pick
up where Wall Street investors have
left off, offering substantial subsidies
for the construction of new nuclear
power plants.
The energy bill contains more
than $12 billion in subsidies for the
construction and operation of new
nuclear power plants.The bill pro-
vides loan guarantees, which reduce
the financial risk of private invest-ment in new plants, shifting the bur-
den to the taxpayer instead. The bill
provides nearly $6 billion in produc-
tion subsidies for new plants that
Making a Comeback?
(continued on page 6)
The energy bill
contains morethan $12 billion
in subsidies for
the construction
and operation of
new nuclear
power plants.
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 5
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 6/16
6 Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine | Fall 2005
C O V E R S T O R Y ■
will make the plants more profitable
in a shorter period of time. In addi-
tion, it protects the nuclear power
industry from being financially
liable in the case of an accident. The
bill also authorizes spending of
more than $1.5 billion for more
research and development.
This funding may not be enough
to convince Wall Street to invest in
new nuclear power plants. In previ-
ous legislative attempts to fund the
construction of new nuclear power
plants, Standard & Poor’s, the world’s
leading provider of independent
credit ratings and risk evaluation,
concluded:“…an electric utility with
a nuclear exposure has weaker cred-
it than one without and can expect
to pay more on the margin for cred-
it. Federal support of construction
costs will do little to change that
reality. Therefore, were a utility to
embark on a new or expanded
nuclear endeavor, Standard & Poor’s
would likely revisit its rating on the
utility.”While it is too early to deter-
mine whether the provisions in the
energy bill are enough to revitalize
the nuclear power industry, these
new subsidies certainly open the
door for a nuclear comeback.
There are Real Solutionsto Climate ChangeOverlooked and ignored by Congress
and nuclear power proponents are
the truly clean and cost effective
solutions to the global warming cri-sis. Renewable energy and energy
efficiency are viable alternatives to
conventional energy technologies,
and many state and local govern-
ments are supporting these tech-
nologies, in spite of the failure at the
federal level.
Wind power is becoming a more
cost effective means of producing
electricity every year, and it now rivals
(continued from page 5)
Wind energy is catching on in Gray County, Kansas. This installation is now generating 110 megawatts of power.
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 6
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 7/16
Friends of the Earth Blocking the
Nuclear Comeback around the World
United States
Friends of the Earth successfully lobbied the House of Representatives to
pass an amendment prohibiting the U.S. Export-Import Bank from financ-
ing nuclear power projects in China.The Export-Import Bank made a pre-
liminary commitment of $5 billion to Westinghouse Corporation for con-
struction of four nuclear reactors in Zhejiang and Guangdong Provinces.The amendment blocking funding for these plants won on a broad, bipar-
tisan basis 313 – 114.The same amendment failed in the Senate but will be
considered this September by a House-Senate conference committee.
Friends of the Earth and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service
(NIRS) launched a web campaign (www.nukeretro.com) focused on opposing
nuclear power subsidies in the energy bill before the Congress.The cam-
paign featured a comic animation set to a retro music score from the
1970s,when nuclear power was in its heyday. The energy bill ultimately
passed and the nuclear industry stands to gain billions in subsidies.
Europe
Global 2000, the Friends of the Earth member group in Austria is leading
a campaign by Friends of the Earth Europe to phase out nuclear power inEurope. They intend to collect one million signatures on a petition to
European Union decision makers. The campaign will mobilize national
environmental organizations across Europe and include a major action
day on April 26, 2006, the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl accident.
C A M P A I G N N O T E S
Fall 2005 | Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine 7
C O V E R S T O R Y ■
conventional sources of energy in
terms of cost per kilowatt hour. Wind
is an abundant source of energy that
can be produced on an industrial
scale and fed into the grid—the
nation’s system of electricity genera-
tion, transmission and distribution.
The United States has more than
8,000 gigawatts of raw wind poten-
tial – nearly 10 times the total
installed electric generating capacity
in the United States in 2001. Solar
power, although more expensive than
wind,is also growing at rapid rates.
Energy efficiency measures are
the most cost effective way of reduc-
ing global warming emissions – by
some estimates, energy efficiency
only costs 2 cents per kilowatt hour,
well below the market price of elec-
tricity. Some states are passing ener-
gy efficiency legislation, promoting
efficiency in light bulbs and other
appliances that can save electricity
and can also cost the consumer less
over the life of the product.
States and cities throughout the
country are also passing renewable
energy standards. Nineteen states
have passed legislation requiring
that a certain percentage of electrici-
ty be produced from renewable ener-
gy sources.Several cities, including
Washington, D.C., and San Francisco,
CA have also passed renewable port-
folio standards. Several states are
also working to reduce global warm-
ing emissions from cars and trucks –
where most of our global warming
emissions come from.
It is this sort of leadership in pro-
moting renewable energy and ener-
gy efficiency that the federal govern-
ment must show in order for the
United States to effectively reduce
global warming emissions, not the
promotion of outdated and costly
nuclear power.
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 7
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 8/16
8 Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine | Fall 2005
S E C U R I T Y ■
By Paul F. Walker
Legacy Program Director
Global Green USA
www.globalgreen.org
UNBEKNOWNST TO MOST
AMERICANS, chemical weapons
remain one of the largest,most dan-
gerous, and costly legacies of the Cold
War and continue to threaten public
health, the environment,and security.
Fortunately, most nations, including
the United States and Russia, have
agreed to abolish their chemical
weapons stockpiles, but the challengeof safe demilitarization remains a
slow, politically contentious, and tech-
nically complex process. In the mean-
time, over 60,000 tons of deadly
chemical agents, stored in millions of
weapons potentially subject to leak-
age and proliferation, remain in sev-
eral countries.
The first time I visited an existing
chemical weapons (CW) stockpile was
in 1994 when I was a member of an
official on-site inspection of one of
Russia’s largest stockpiles.This was a
U.S.delegation including both con-
gressional and executive branch
members to visit the easternmost of
seven declared Russian CW arsenals.
We flew three hours east from
Moscow and spent a full day inside a
remote chemical weapons depot in
Siberia, just north of Kazakhstan,
inspecting some two million artillery
and missile warheads filled with VX
nerve agent. What struck us most at
the time were two things: the enor-mous size of this arsenal, represent-
ing about 14 percent of the Russian
CW arsenal;and the very poor securi-
ty of the stockpile,housed in old
above-ground,corrugated metal
buildings with bicycle padlocks on the
doors,broken windows, and holes in
the roof.
Shortly thereafter, at our discrete
urging, the U.S. began negotiations
with Russia to help secure and safely
destroy this stockpile.Today, over a
decade later, a mammoth destruction
facility is 50 percent constructed atthe Siberian site, not far from the vil-
lage of Shchuch’ye (pronounced
“Shoo-Shee”), midway between the
cities of Chelyabinsk and Kurgan in
the Kurgan Region.
This Siberian site,housing 5,400
tons of Russian VX nerve agent, is one
of sixteen CW stockpiles in the U.S.
and Russia now in the process of
demilitarization and remediation.
Russia and the U.S.have declared
40,000 and 31,500 tons of chemical
weapons respectively to theOrganization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the
inspection and verification regime
established by the 1993 Chemical
Weapons Convention (CWC), in The
Hague. Another 171 countries have
joined the CWC, of which four addi-
tional ones – Albania, India, Libya, and
South Korea – have declared much
smaller CW stockpiles ranging in size
from a few tons to some 500 or more.
These six declared CW possessor
states are obliged to abolish their
stockpiles by April 2012 at the latest(which includes a five-year extension
to initial 2007 CWC deadlines).
However, the process of demilitariza-
tion has been much longer, more
costly and more complex than the
countries involved had first imagined.
Despite DestructionSchedule, StockpilesRemainThe U.S. has declared nine stockpiles
with 31,500 tons of chemical
weapons. Over the past fifteen yearsthe U.S. has destroyed about 35 per-
cent of this arsenal. Russia has
declared seven stockpiles with
40,000 tons of chemical weapons. To
date, Russia has destroyed slightly
The Secret Time Bomb – Chemical WeaponsEnvironmental, Public Health, and Security Threats
Russian artillery shells filled with VX nerve agent stored at Shchuch'ye, Kurgan Oblast, in Siberia.
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 8
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 9/16
Fall 2005 | Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine 9
S E C U R I T Y ■
over 2 percent of its arsenal – about
850 tons – with only one facility
operating at Gorny. Two more facili-
ties are scheduled to begin operat-
ing next year.
The U.S.had originally planned
over twenty years ago to finish
destruction by 1995.This deadline has
been pushed back several times and
now is projected to be 2012, the final
CWC deadline.Russia has been very
slow to begin destruction, opening its
first facility at Gorny in December
2002. It still hopes to meet the 2012
CWC deadline for 100 percent destruc-
tion,but this will be difficult.
The U.S. initially projected a total
program cost of $2 billion. This has
now skyrocketed to about $40 bil-lion. Likewise, Russia had planned on
$2-3 billion, but now projects $7-10
billion in total costs to destroy its
CW arsenal. Because of these enor-
mous and unplanned costs, it is
important that the West,through
the G8 Global Partnership, help
Russia to cover these costs. The U.S.,
through its Cooperative Threat
Reduction (CTR or “Nunn-Lugar”)
Program, has committed over $1 bil-
lion to Russian CW destruction.
One of the major causes in sched-ule delays and cost escalation has
been disagreement and uncertainty
on the most appropriate technolo-
gies. Given that a minute amount of
chemical agent can cause immedi-
ate death, and that many of them
are packaged with explosives, most
technologies of destruction have had
to be both robotic and able to con-
tain explosions. Incineration has
been the technology of choice of the
U.S. Army, while chemical neutraliza-
tion with hot water (in the case ofmustard agent) or with caustic
reagents such as sodium hydroxide
(in the case of VX, sarin, and soman
nerve agents) has been chosen by
Russia and four U.S. states.
Environmental, PublicHealth and SecurityThreatsMost chemical weapons, in storage
for over three decades, have been
subject to leakage and release of live
agent into their protected bunkers;
some of this agent has leaked out-
side, but in relatively small amounts.
Accidents have also happened dur-
ing disassembly, but no one has yet
been killed by leakage or accident;there have been minor worker
injuries at stockpile sites.
There is also concern over
gaseous, solid, and liquid toxic waste
generated by the incineration and
neutralization demilitarization
processes. The high thermal process-
es generate thousands of tons of
atmospheric waste daily; although
permitted by federal and state regu-
latory agencies, these smokestack
emissions contain an undetermined
amount of pollutants which driftuncontrolled downwind. Neutralized
liquid wastes also contain slightly
toxic substances, but can be held,
tested, and only then released (or
retreated) and are much more man-
ageable.
In addition to declared stockpiles,
both the U.S. and Russia, along with
many other nations, have dumped
chemical agents and weapons on
land and sea over the last century.
The U.S. alone suspects some 250
“nonstockpile”dump sites in three
dozen states,Puerto Rico, and the
District of Columbia. While these
sites pose little security risk, they
have been shown to be dangerous to
health and the environment, espe-
cially if accidentally unearthed.
One of the greatest concerns with
chemical weapons is the risk of
theft,diversion, and proliferation.
Terrorist groups such as Aum
Shinrikyo in Tokyo in 1995 have used
chemical weapons, and others suchas Al Qaeda have vowed to obtain
weapons of mass destruction. While
U.S. CW arsenals are quite secure
from theft,Russia’s stockpile security
leaves much to be desired. Many of
the CW stockpiles are also vulnera-
ble to attack such as we experienced
on September 11, 2001.
The FutureWhile 173 countries have joined the
Chemical Weapons Convention
since it opened for signature inJanuary 1993, nine states remain
non-signatory and another twelve
have not yet ratified it (as of August
29, 2005). The most worrisome are
Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, North Korea,
Somalia, and Syria, because they are
suspected of chemical weapons
activities.These states must eventu-
ally be brought into the CWC
regime.
The bottom line is that we all
need to support the timely and safe
destruction of this secret and tickingtime bomb – chemical weapons
stockpiles and dump sites – but we
must make sure that we do no harm
to either the environment or public
health in the process.
Russian missile warhead filled with VX nerveagent, stored at Shchuch'ye, Kurgan Oblast,in Siberia.
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 9
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 10/16
10 Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine | Fall 2005
I N B R I E F ■
Rice Farmers in MissouriStand Up to VentriaFriends of the Earth and Anheuser-
Busch aided Missouri rice farmers in
May by helping chase Ventria
Bioscience out of Missouri. Ventria
planned to grow pharmaceutical-
producing genetically engineered
rice in Missouri. Anheuser-Busch
threatened to boycott Show-Me
state rice if Ventria was allowed to
plant. Now, Ventria’s in North
Carolina, growing 75 acres near a
rice germplasm facility, against theadvice of rice breeders there.
Most of the few ongoing bio-
pharm field trials, however, now uti-
lize non-food crops (like tobacco) or
marginal food (safflower) crops.
Corn, once the favorite crop for this
reckless experimentation is little
used now, thanks in part to Friends
of the Earth’s efforts.
Protecting Yellowstone &Grand TetonThe Department of the Interior recent-
ly announced that it will begin a thirdstudy of the impact of winter recre-
ation on Yellowstone and Grand Teton
National Parks.These two parks, which
are located primarily within
Northwestern Wyoming, are the
crown jewels of the system.Two previ-
ous winter use studies showed that
the best way to protect resources and
wildlife is to eliminate snowmobiles.
The Bush administration rejected
these studies.Thanks in part to a legal
challenge by Bluewater Network – a
division of Friends of the Earth, the
Interior Department must seek addi-
tional public input before it can move
forward with any plans to turn our
first national park into a motorized
amusem*nt park.
In Landmark Decision,Federal Court RecognizesHarm Caused by GlobalWarmingIn a groundbreaking case, a federal
judge in California ruled recently
against the Bush administration and
allowed a Friends of the Earth global
warming lawsuit to proceed.The
landmark decision is the first time
that a federal court has specifically
granted legal standing for a suit that
challenges the federal government to
account for impacts on the Earth’s cli-
mate.The case, brought by Friends of
the Earth, Greenpeace,and four
California and Colorado cities, charges
that the Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im)
and the Oversees Private Investment
Corporation (OPIC) have financed oil
and other fossil fuel projects around
the world without first evaluating the
projects’global warming impacts to
the United States.The judge noted
that the “projects supported by OPIC
and Ex-Im are directly or indirectlyresponsible for approximately 1,911
million tonnes of carbon dioxide and
methane emissions annually, which
equals nearly eight percent of the
world’s emissions and is equivalent to
one third of the total carbon emis-
sions from the United States in 2003.”
Green Mountain NationalForest ProtectedCalling the Forest Service’s decision
to log 300 acres of the Green
Mountain National Forest “arbitrary
and capricious,”the U.S. Second
Circuit Court of Appeals handed a
solid victory to environmentalists in
June.The ruling vacates a decision to
log pristine, unique and rugged por-
tions of the national forest in the
towns of Chittenden and Rochester,
Vermont. Friends of the Earth, Forest
Watch, and the Forest ConservationCouncil joined forces in 2003 to stop
the Old Joe Timber Sale because of
shared concerns about the impacts
of logging on recreation,water qual-
ity and wildlife. Vermont’s Federal
District Court denied the lawsuit on
March 16, 2004. The groups appealed
the District Court’s decision to the
Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit and the District Court’s deci-
sion was reversed.
Campaign News
Environmental groups accuse shipping com-panies of behaving like pirates in the controlthey exert over the IMO.
photocredit:Mik
eWells/FriendsoftheEarthYellowstone National Park
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 10
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 11/16
Fall 2005 | Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine 11
I N B R I E F ■
Shipping Pollution ProtestBluewater Network called for an end
to ship pollution piracy at the doors
of the London-based United Nations
body charged with regulating global
shipping.The InternationalMaritime Organization (IMO) has
failed to protect people and the
planet from dirty diesel emissions
spewed by ship smokestacks.
Unfortunately, the IMO is dominated
by so-called “flag-of-convenience”
nations such as Panama and Liberia
that are known for registering ships
without regard for public health and
the environment. A single cargo ship
coming into port releases as much
pollution as 350,000 current-model-
year cars in one hour. The actionhelped convince the IMO to begin
negotiating stronger international
air pollution standards for ships.
Friends of the EarthLeading on AmtrakAmtrak is one of the most fuel effi-
cient and environmentally friendly
ways to travel. So when the Bush
administration zeroed out Amtrak’s
yearly budget in February, Friends of
the Earth began an intensive cam-
paign to stop the elimination of
America’s rail system. Leading the
environmental community, Friends
of the Earth was able to convince a
bipartisan majority in the House of
Representatives to approve the high-
est level of funding in years. In the
face of budget cuts across the board,
this shows a significant commit-
ment by Congress to the benefits of
an environmentally friendly trans-
portation choice.
Challenging Gas GuzzlingVolvosVolvo has long enjoyed a reputation
as a leader in making cars safer for
passengers and the environment. But
since being purchased by the Ford
Motor Company – which ranks dead
last in fuel economy among major
automakers – Volvo has added a new
lineup of gas-guzzling SUVs to its fleetand not a single new model averages
more than 26.1 miles per gallon.
Bluewater Network recently published
an ad in The New York Times asking
Volvo to stand up to Ford by again
building cars that will protect the
planet’s fragile environment.Visit the
Bluewater web site at www.bluewater-
network.org to send a letter to Volvo.
Bluewater Network recently ran this full-pagead in The New York Times, and Mother Jones
online.
United States Postal Service Statement of Ownership, Management, and Circulation1. Publication Title: Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine 2. Publication Number: 0882-300 3. Filing Date: 9/16/2005 4. Issue Frequency: Quarterly 5. Number of Issues Published Annually: 4 6. Annual SubscriptionPrice: $25 7. Complete Mailing Address of Known Office of Publication: Friends of the Earth, 1717 Massachusetts Ave. NW #600, Washington, DC 20036 Contact Person: Lisa Grob Telephone: 202-783-7400 x7448. Complete Mailing Address of Headquarters or General Business Office of Publisher: Friends of the Earth, 1717 Massachusetts Ave. NW #600, Washington, DC 20036 9. Full Names and Complete Mailing
Addresses of Publisher, Editor, and Managing Editor: Publisher: Friends of the Earth Editor/Managing Editor: Lisa Grob, 1717 Massachusetts Ave. NW #600, Washington, DC 20036 Editor: Lisa Grob, Friends of theEarth, 1717 Massachusetts Ave. NW #600, Washington, DC 20036 Managing Editor: Lisa Grob, Friends of the Earth, 1717 Massachusetts Ave. NW #600, Washington, DC 20036 10. Owner: Friends of the Earth,1717 Massachusetts Ave. NW #600, Washington, DC 20036 11. Known Bondholders, Mortgagees, and Other Security Holders Owning or Holding 1 Percent or More of Total Amount of Bonds, Mortgages, or OtherSecurities: None 12. Tax Status: Has Not Changed During Preceding 12 Months 13. Publication Title: Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine 14. Issue Date for Circulation Data Below: October 2005
16. Publication of Statement of Ownership: Publication required. Will be printed i n the Volume 35, No. 3 issue of this publication.
17. Signature and Title of Editor, Publisher, Business Manager, or Owner
I certify that all information furnished on this form is true and complete. I understand that anyone who furnishes false or misleading information on this form or who omits material or information requested on
the form may be subject to criminal sanctions (including fines and imprisonment) and/or civil sanctions (including civil penalties).
15. Extent and Nature of Circulation Average No. Copies Each Issue DuringPreceding 12 Months
No. Copies of Single Issue PublishedNearest to Filing Date
a. Total Number of Copies (Net Press run) 20,200 20,000
(1) Paid/Requested Outside-County Mail Subscriptions Stated on Form 3541. 19,000 19,000
(2) Paid In-County Subscriptions Stated on Form 3541
(3) Sales Through Dealers and Carriers, Street Vendors, Counter Sales, and Other Non-USPS Paid Distribution
(4) Other Classes Mailed Through the USPS
c. Total Paid and/or Requested Circulation 19,000 19,000
(1) Outside-County as Stated on Form 3541 400 500
(2) In-County as Stated on Form 3541
(3) Other Classes Mailed Through the USPS
e. Free Distribution Outside the Mail 200 250
f. Total Free Distribution 600 750
g. Total Distribution 19,600 19,750
h. Copies not Distributed 600 250i. Total 20,200 20,000
j. Percent Paid and/or Requested Circulation 96% 96%
b. Paid and/or
Requested
Circulation
d. Free
Distribution
by Mail
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 11
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 12/16
12 Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine | Fall 2005
S P O T L I G H T O N W I L D L I F E ■
By Michelle Medeiros,
Campaigner, Friends of the Earth
THE GREAT APES – chimpanzees,
orangutans, and gorillas – are man’s
closest relatives in the animal king-
dom, with a genetic make up that is
96-99 percent identical to that of
humans. The gorilla’s genetic make-
up is 97.7 percent the same as ours:
we have physical similarities, our
social habits are similar,and we
express our emotions similarly.The
only significant difference between
gorillas and humans is the ability to
communicate through spoken lan-
guage. The world’s forests are home
to these majestic animals, but the
pressures of deforestation, illegal
hunting, and regional conflict
threaten their very existence.The
mountain gorilla of Central Africa is
perhaps one of the most endan-gered of the great apes, with only
about 600 remaining in the wild.
These gorillas live in the eastern
mountains of Africa between the
Virunga Mountains of the
Democratic Republic of Congo and in
the Bwindi Impenetrable Forest
National Park in Uganda.
Mountain gorillas are sometimes
portrayed as chest-pounding, hulk-
ing wild animals, eliciting unwar-
ranted fear. These gorillas are quite
large: the adult male can reach 400
pounds, while females can reach
about 200, and the lead male in a
group of gorillas, known as the sil-
verback, is very protective of his
brood and will pound his chest
when the family is threatened.
However, these gorillas are generally
quite peaceful and gentle. Typically,
gorilla families will spend most of
their time searching for food such as
stems,leaves and fruits, covering
hundreds of yards or more in a day.
The families will stop to relax,
watching the group’s young as they
frolic playfully in their jungle home.
After a long day of traveling and eat-
ing the family makes a nest out of
vegetation, either in treetops or on
the ground, and will spend the night
in this spot only to start their jour-
ney once again in the morning.Gorillas are actually the smartest
of the primates and exhibit human
emotions like happiness and sad-
ness. Scientists have discovered that
gorillas are able to learn sign lan-
guage to communicate words,and
some gorillas have even put words
together to form simple sentences.
Koko - the world’s most renowned
gorilla - was rescued as a baby and
has been taught sign language dur-
ing her years living with humans.
Koko now has a vocabulary of over
1,000 words and has become an
ambassador for the great apes,
demonstrating to the world the
intelligence of the mountain gorilla.
Sadly, even though we have
learned so much about the intelli-
Mountain Gorillas
of Central Africa
On the Brink
Gorillas are actually
the smartest of the
primates and exhibit
human emotions like
happiness and sadness.
photo credit: ©Greenpeace/Daniel Beltrá
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 12
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 13/16
Fall 2005 | Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine 13
gence and majesty of these animals,
man remains the biggest threat to
the existence of this species.The
habitat for mountain gorillas is
shrinking at an alarming rate, as the
forests of eastern Africa are claimed
by human refugees forced to flee
their communities after years of vio-
lent conflict.War in Rwanda, Uganda
and the Democratic Republic ofCongo (DRC), has resulted in the
deaths of millions of people – over
3.5 million alone in DRC – and has
also destroyed and infringed on the
gorillas’ habitat.
Gorillas are also being killed for
their meat, often referred to as bush-
meat.Though forest communities
have hunted great apes for food for
thousands of years, increased demand
of the exotic bushmeat has commer-
cialized this once traditional hunting
ritual. The commercial bushmeat
trade threatens gorillas, chimpanzees
and bonobos with extinction.
The expansion of industrial log-
ging in the lush jungles full of hard-
wood trees is another key threat to
the gorillas.These hardwood trees are
often used in the U.S. for flooring,
paneling, and high-end furniture.The
logging roads open up access to
forested areas for poaching, bush-
meat hunting,agriculture expansion,
and illegal logging.It is estimated
that if the current trends continue,
the remaining wild apes of Africa will
be gone within the next few decades.
Even with immediate action it will
not be easy to save gorillas from the
looming threat of extinction.Gorilla
populations recover slowly, as the
female generally has only two to six
offspring in her lifetime. Newborn
gorillas are weak and tiny,weighing
about 4 pounds, and require substan-
tial care and protection. As their habi-
tat is destroyed, gorillas have less area
to roam, isolating them into smaller
groups and making them more sus-
ceptible to extinction due to the loss
of genetic diversity.
Friends of the Earth’s work recog-
nizes that it is critical that we con-
tinue to work with governments andcommunities to create land use
plans and regulations that allow
both forest dependant communities
and the mountain gorilla access to
the forests and offer protection from
the threats of logging, agricultural
expansion, and the commercial
bushmeat trade. Friends of the Earth
has begun a new campaign that
calls for the ecologically sustainable
and socially just use of the
Democratic Republic of Congo’s vast
natural resources located in the
Congo Basin region of Central Africa,
the world’s second largest rainforest.
For updates on this campaign, sign
up for Friends of the Earth news and
email alerts at http://www.foe.org.
Even with immediate
action it will not be
easy to save gorillas
from the looming
threat of extinction.
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 13
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 14/16
14 Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine | Fall 2005
THE PRODUCTS WE BUY to scrub,
sterilize and beautify our houses are
often anything but healthy. In fact,
household cleaners are responsible
for nearly 10 percent of all toxic
exposures reported to U.S. Poison
Control Centers. In addition to
indoor pollution these products
take a toll on the environment.
Cleaning products pass through
municipal treatment plants after
being poured down household
drains and subsequently enter ourwaterways. Although most of the
ingredients break down into harm-
less substances during treatment,
some do not, threatening water
quality and wildlife.
You can make your own cleaners
easily and inexpensively using
ingredients found in your kitchen.
Keep the following tips in mind
when concocting your own cleaners:
Be sure to label your mixtures to
avoid confusion
Liquid soap refers to castile soap,
although coconut oil soap is a
fine alternative.
Vinegar means distilled white
vinegar, which has a slight odor
when wet, yet leaves no smell
once dry.
Washing soda and borax, though
natural can irritate skin, so use
gloves. Borax can be toxic when
swallowed, so keep out of reach
of children.
All-purpose disinfectant: To be used
in the bathroom, the kitchen or
wherever. Combine two teaspoons
borax, four tablespoons vinegar and
three to four cups hot water in a
spray bottle. (For extra cleaning
power, add 1/4 teaspoon liquid soap
to the mixture).
General dusting: In a bowl, mix one
teaspoon olive oil per 1/2 cup vine-
gar. Apply with a soft cloth.
Detergent booster: Adding baking
soda or washing soda reduces the
amount of laundry detergent you
need to use by softening the water
and thus increasing the detergent’s
power. For liquid detergent, add 1/2
cup of soda at the beginning of the
wash. For powdered detergent, add
1/2 cup of soda during the rinse cycle.
Air freshener: Combine one tea-
spoon baking soda, one teaspoon
vinegar or lemon juice, and two
cups hot water in a spray bottle.
Baking soda absorbs odors, whilevinegar deodorizes.
Sources:
The Green Guide
http://www.thegreenguide.com/green-cleaning-products/
Children’s Health Environmental Coalition
http://www.checnet.org/HealtheHouse
Recipes fora Clean House
E N V I R O N M E N T A L L I V I N G ■
98906mvpR2 10/19/05 10:43 AM Page 14
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 15/16
Fall 2005 | Friends of the Earth Newsmagazine 15
By Elizabeth Bast
SAKHALIN IS A LONG NARROW island
in the Pacific Ocean,several miles off ofthe coast of Russia.Comprised of three
parallel mountain chains,the island
has 60,000 streams and rivers and is
covered with forests.The seas off the
coast of the island are among the
most productive areas of ocean in the
world with abundant fish and shell-
fish,and local communities rely on
these waters for their livelihoods.The
area off the island is also a feeding
ground for the Western Pacific grey
whale,an endangered species with an
estimated 100 surviving individuals.A consortium of oil companies led
by Shell is now building two 500-
mile pipelines, two offshore drilling
platforms, four undersea pipelines,
and a massive liquefied natural gas
plant off the shores of Sakhalin
Island.The pipelines will cross 21
seismic faults and over 1000 rivers
and streams on the island, including
salmon spawning grounds. The proj-
ect is also located near the Western
Pacific grey whales’ feeding grounds.
Any oil or gas accidents or leaks
could wreak havoc on the island, its
wildlife and the surrounding waters.
But in spite of the risks, financing for
the project is expected and construc-
tion is proceeding.
Local indigenous communities
maintain that their livelihoods based
on fishing and reindeer herding have
already been adversely impacted by
oil development,and are staunchly
opposed to the project. In January of
this year, indigenous residentsendured minus 30-degree tempera-
tures to peacefully blockade the
Sakhalin II mega-project and protest
the negative impact it will have.
Expected profits from oil and gas
are driving Shell and its partners.
However, Credit Suisse First Boston
(CSFB), by providing financial advising
for this harmful project, is violating
its own commitment to the Equator
Principles – a set of environmental
guidelines for banks that require sub-stantial safeguards for projects with
this degree of environmental risk.
The Sakhalin II project is currently
in its second phase of financing and
construction. In 1994, Shell,
Mitsubishi and Mitsui established
the Sakhalin Energy Investment
Company,which signed a production
sharing agreement with the Russian
government to develop the Sakhalin
II oil and gas deposits. In 1998,Shell
began the first phase of the Sakhalin
II project, with $116 million in financ-
ing each from the U.S. Overseas
Private Investment Corporation
(OPIC), the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development
(EBRD), and Japan Bank for
International Cooperation (JBIC).
This first phase included the con-
struction of a drilling platform off
the coast of Sakhalin. Residents of
Sakhalin say that since the construc-
tion of this first platform, there have
been fewer and lower quality fish in
the waters.Plans for phase two are
much more extensive, and worries of
environmental and social impacts
have increased.
Shell is currently negotiating
again with the Japan Bank for
International Cooperation (JBIC) and
the U.S. Export-Import Bank – a U.S.government agency that lends
money to U.S.companies for overseas
projects – to finance the project.
Two recent developments should
slow financing and construction of
the project. In July, Shell announced
that the project would be delayed
and that estimates for project costs
are now on “the order of $20 billion.”
Originally estimated to cost $12 bil-
lion, Sakhalin II was described as the
largest single integrated oil and gas
project currently being undertaken,and this new estimate puts Sakhalin
II off the charts.
Later in the month, citing environ-
mental concerns, a Russian court
upheld a decision rejecting an envi-
ronmental impact review conducted
by Royal Dutch/Shell’s Sakhalin
Energy Investment Corporation,
meaning that the company will have
to halt construction of the plant
until its review is approved by the
Russian courts.
Friends of the Earth will continue
its campaign in solidarity with local
communities to fight this environ-
mentally and socially harmful proj-
ect.
Shell Oil Project Threatens Wildlife
I N T E R N A T I O N A L ■
Friends of the Earth and a coalition of groupsran this ad in the Financial Times, criticizingthe Shell project.
98906mvp 10/13/05 10:57 AM Page 15
8/8/2019 Fall 2005 Friends of the Earth Magazine, Friends of the Earth
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/fall-2005-friends-of-the-earth-magazine-friends-of-the-earth 16/16
PERIODICALS
POSTAGE PAID AT
WASHINGTON, DC
AND ADDITIONAL
MAILING OFFICESFall 2005 | Volume 35, Number 3
1717 Massachusetts Avenue, NW,Suite 600
Washington,DC 20036-2008
W H A T Y O U C A N D O ■
MANY EMPLOYERS SPONSOR work-
place giving programs to encourage
employees to support organizations
important to their communities.Employees can donate a small portion
of their salary to a specific charity
through payroll deduction. Friends of
the Earth participates in hundreds of
these campaigns directly and in many
places through Earth Share. Our desig-
nation number is 0908.
If your employer participates in the
Combined Federal Campaign, United
Way or other giving campaigns at the
state or local level, you can support
Friends of the Earth directly.
Earth Share
Earth Share, a nation-
wide network of
America’s leading non-
profit environmental and
conservation organiza-
tions, works to promote environmental
education and charitable giving
through workplace giving campaigns.
You can make your gift directly to
us or as a national member of Earth
Share, Friends of the Earth will receive
a percentage of all undesignated gifts
given to Earth Share.
Earth Share now participates incampaigns at hundreds of govern-
ment and corporate workplaces,
including the federal government’s
Combined Federal Campaign (CFC).
Find out if Earth Share participates at
your workplace and to get more infor-
mation visit www.earthshare.org
For more information contact Rosemary Greenaway,
director of membership,202-222-0722 or
[emailprotected]
Now is the Season for Workplace Giving!
M E M B E R N O T I C E ■
AT THE JUNE 24 MEETING of the
Friends of the Earth Board of Directors
Dan Gabel was elected Chairman of
the board. He succeeds Avis Ogilvy
Moore. Moore,a charter member of
Friends of the Earth has been a life
long environmentalist, activist, and
researcher. Gabel, President and CEO,
Hagedorn & Company, has been
involved with Friends of the Earth
since its inception also. He has served
on the Friends of the Earth Board since
1995. Gabel served as treasurer of the
board for ten years during Friends of
the Earth’s early years.
Changing of the Guard
A copy of the latest Financial Report and Registration filed by this organization may be obtained by contacting us at Friends of the Earth, 1717 Massachusetts Ave. NW Suite 600, Washington DC 20036-2008. Toll-freenumber: 877-843-8687. Or, for residents of the following states, by contacting any of the state agencies: CALIFORNIA – A copy of the Official Financial Statement may be obtained from the Attorney General’s Registryof Charitable Trusts, Department of Justice, P.O. Box 903447, Sacramento, CA 94203-4470 or by calling 916-445-2021. FLORIDA -A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION MAYBE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING TOLL-FREE, WITHIN THE STATE, 1-800-435-7352. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORsem*nT, APPROVAL OR RECOMMENDA-TION BY THE STATE. Florida registration # CH960. KANSASAnnual financial report is filed with Secretary of State #258-204-7. MARYLAND For the cost of copies and postage: Office of the Secretary of State, StateHouse, Annapolis, MD 21401. MICHIGAN MICS 10926. MISSISSIPPI – The official registration and financial information of Friends of the Earth, Inc. may be obtained from the Mississippi Secretary of State’s office bycalling 1-888-236-6167. Registration by the Secretary of State does not imply endorsem*nt by the Secretary of State. NEW JERSEY INFORMATION FILED WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CONCERNING THIS CHAR-
ITABLE SOLCITATION MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY BY CALLING 973-504-6215. REGISTRATION WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DOES NOT IMPLYENDORsem*nT. NEW YORK Office of the Attorney General, Department of Law, Charities Bureau, 120 Broadway, New York, NY 10271. NORTH CAROLINA FINANCIAL INFORMATION ABOUT THIS ORGANIZA-TION AND A COPY OF ITS LICENSE ARE AVAILABLE FROM THE STATE SOLICITATION LICENSING BRANCH AT 1-888-830-4989. THE LICENSE IS NOT AN ENDORsem*nT BY THE STATE. PENNSYLVANIA – Theofficial registration and financial information of Friends of the Earth may be obtained from Pennsylvania Department of State by calling toll-free within the state 1-800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsem*nt.UTAH – Permit #C495. VIRGINIA State Division of Consumer Affairs, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, P.O. Box 1163, Richmond, VA 23218; 1-800-552-9963. WASHINGTON - Charities Division,Office of the Secretary of the State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504-0422; 1-800-332-4483. WEST VIRGINIA West Virginia residents may obtain a summary of the registration and financial documents fromthe Secretary of State, State Capitol, Charleston, WV 25305. Registration does not imply endorsem*nt.
98906mvpR1 10/19/05 8:22 AM Page 16