Nordhaus and Shellenberger: Overselling the Right Message

Thu, 2007-09-27 11:15Chris Mooney
Chris Mooney's picture

Nordhaus and Shellenberger: Overselling the Right Message

You probably heard already: The “Death of Environmentalism” guys are back, once again explaining the follies of the green movement.

Their new book, Break Through, has created a lot of chatter with its argument that enviros are too darn pessimistic, and repeatedly shoot themselves in the foot with command-and-control regulatory thinking and doom and gloom talking.

I decided to check out the Cliff notes version of Breakthrough–published in article/excerpt form recently in The New Republic. What I read was both quite sophisticated and yet, at the same time, a bit grating. You see, Nordhaus and Shellenberger are really arguing against a state of mind, a zeitgeist even, rather than anything very specific. Which is fine–especially if you attack the right zeitgeist (which they do). The approach, however, allows them simultaneously to rebuke greens and yet also outline a clean energy policy agenda that most environmentalists–at least as I understand the term–would probably agree with.

It's a matter of emphasis, really. It's a matter of framing.

And indeed, it's on the subject of framing environmental messages where Nordhaus and Shellenberger make their most resonant point. Let's say it again: Doom and gloom = bad messaging. This is not exactly a new observation, and it happens to be grounded in tons of social science research and public opinion data. As American University professor Matthew Nisbet and I have argued repeatedly, you don't want to frame global warming as a “Pandora's Box” of untold catastrophes. Not only does this lead to a temptation to oversell the science about many still uncertain climate impacts. It also makes people feel helpless, or worse. As Nordhaus and Shellenberger put it:

Cautionary tales and narratives of eco-apocalypse tend to provoke fatalism, conservatism, and survivalism among voters—not the rational embrace of environmental policies. This research is consistent with extensive social-science research that strongly correlates fear, rising insecurity, and pessimism about the future with resistance to change.”

So how do you frame environmental issues? Well, for one thing, you use optimism–and a sense of can-do spirit–to your advantage. You don't tell people that the world is going to end, or that they're going to be poorer; rather, you tell them there are economic opportunities lying in wait if we address global warming. And then they’re more inclined to listen. Indeed, I would argue that if there's one central reason the climate issue has shifted of late, it's that many energy and transportation industry companies are changing their tune and waking up to the fact that they will still be making money–and perhaps even more of it–in a post-carbon world.

Not only do Nordhaus and Shellenberger get the central global warming message right–they go farther with detailed policy prescriptions. The bulk of their New Republic article explains why we must invest massively in new clean energy innovations, instead of just emphasizing caps on pollution all the time. After all, the latter strategy quickly and inevitably leads to counter-charges about wrecking the economy and keeping people poor–and suddenly we find economics cutting against environmental interests, rather than working in their favor.

My main problem with this line of argument is that I don't disagree with it–which is precisely the point. I mean, does anyone deny that global warming is fundamentally an energy problem, and that solving it will necessitate bringing online innovative new technologies that let us power our societies in a way that's both cheaper and cleaner?

I for one have always argued that dealing with this problem requires a three-legged-stool approach:

    1) mitigation,

    2) adaptation, and

    3) innovation.

You can play up any leg of the stool at different times, but all are going to be critical. And we might add one more leg as well: Leadership. (This has always been the most wobbly one.)

At least in The New Republic, Nordhaus and Shellenberger appear to ignore leg 2 altogether. Instead they say we've stressed leg 1 too much and leg 3 too little, which is almost certainly true. But in saying this, are these authors really being very heretical? Would they really go so far as to disagree that there's a need to cap emissions, for example? I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think so. Even as they beat up on the standard environmental regulatory approach when applied to global warming, at the end of the New Republic piece Nordhaus and Shellenberger say this:

To be sure, the effort to reduce and stabilize global greenhouse gas emissions will require a major regulatory effort to make sure that everyone is playing by the same rules, provide a stable investment environment for nations and businesses, and increase the cost of fossil fuels relative to cleaner energy sources.”

Doesn't this sound like emission caps to you–especially since for many nations and businesses, a “stable investment environment” means knowing how much they can and can't pollute? It sure does to me. So my problem with Nordhaus and Shellenberger isn't that they're wrong.

No: It's that where they're right–which they usually are–it's often because the answer is more obvious than I think they'd like to admit.

Previous Comments

Dear Chris – Thanks for blogging on the article!

The truth is that our proposal is VERY different from the conventional approach to global warming, which is regulation-centered rather than investment-centered. The major global warming legislation in Congress is focused on emissions caps, not on generating the needed investment for clean energy. However, this legislation COULD generate the investment money if it was structured right. Ted and I will be speaking out for this in the coming months.

Meanwhile, we’d love your thoughts on the book. You will likely find much to disagree with – and hopefully agree with, too.

Finally, we believe that one of the biggest obstacles to winning action on global warming comes not from global warming deniers but rather from the fact that it is a relatively low priority for the public. Most Americans believe global warming is happening and is human-caused (or a mix between human-caused and natural). But it consistently comes in dead last as a list of priorities. We just did a new poll that found that Americans are most scared that energy prices will rise than of global warming – that’s a big problem given that the environmentalist strategy to dealing with global warming is premised on raising energy prices. Link to our new poll is here:

http://www.americanenvironics.com/

Our approach is different. We want to put investment, jobs and economic growth at the center. The focus should be on making clean energy cheap – not dirty energy expensive. At a policy level, this means setting it up so that any regulation generates at least the $30 billion required to do this. It’s an agenda you could support for many other reasons – economic competitiveness, energy independence, educational opportunity – that don’t require you to believe that global warming is human-caused. In that way it cuts through the partisanship that has plagued global warming politics ever since the Senate voted 97-0 to preemptively reject Kyoto in 1997.

Best regards, and thanks again for tracking this very important debate! Michael

You say that “the focus should be on making clean energy cheap – not dirty energy expensive.” I agree with Chris that it has to be both. If the press would present balanced coverage of both of these approaches, plus the need for regulatory action, we’d be WAY ahead. Instead they present “balanced” coverage of a non-existent “debate” within the scientific community about the causes of global warming, which is completely counter-productive.

Investment in clean energy is essential, but we can’t just sit back and blithely continue to churn out CO2 from dirty energy sources until new systems are in place. You might check out Emily Murgatroyd’s item elsewhere on this site, Michael, about the readiness of the American people to accept aggressive action: New poll: 68% of Americans support aggressive international climate treaty

I tend to be a bit “skeptical” about the polls suggestion. While I have no doubt believe it to be true, I just question the ability for people really to accept aggressive changes. Its one thing to say you will accept it, and another to actually do it. There are outcries when gas was over a dollar and mass complaining that the government needs to take action and reduce gas taxes….Perhaps today is my glass is half empty day…..

inharmoniously abbasi gimlet babylike condonation cauda chromatosphere zoonosology
Color Shop http://stelmashenko.tripod.com

inharmoniously abbasi gimlet babylike condonation cauda chromatosphere zoonosology
Coastal Accommodation http://www.jeffco.edu/

inharmoniously abbasi gimlet babylike condonation cauda chromatosphere zoonosology
Lewis Construction http://www.zioninprophecy.com

inharmoniously abbasi gimlet babylike condonation cauda chromatosphere zoonosology
Outdoor Drinking Fountain
http://www.angelfire.com/dawdndsu/xd.html
Laser Color Printers
http://www.angelfire.com/nixvpdeu/ri.html
Candomble Religion Music Dance Custom
http://www.angelfire.com/nefetljn/1jf.html
Ambit Cable Modem Driver
http://www.angelfire.com/elekiawq/ur.html
Side Affect Of Prednisone
http://www.angelfire.com/bdzbgyvf/5u.html
Seattle Roadster Show
http://www.angelfire.com/qhkojbrr/5za.html
Overland Park Ks
http://www.angelfire.com/nefetljn/41i.html
Richmond 5 Speed
http://www.angelfire.com/nropmhuh/30k.html
Heavy Duty Float Switch
http://www.angelfire.com/elekiawq/372.html
Bird House Log
http://www.angelfire.com/dxiduhbo/5d3.html
Massage Outcall Dallas
http://www.angelfire.com/elekiawq/5hn.html
Foot Bones
http://www.angelfire.com/bpdegmyz/3dr.html
Mla Style Electronic Formats
http://www.angelfire.com/mpztccbn/5im.html
Yamaha Dt 250 1978
http://www.angelfire.com/qhkojbrr/5pi.html
Factor X Flybox Ramp
http://www.angelfire.com/dawdndsu/58p.html
New Zealand Nick Name
http://www.angelfire.com/vdhltoxc/3ki.html
Las Vegas Vacation Packages
http://www.angelfire.com/flvkzkff/5j.html
Address Book To Look Up Someone
http://www.angelfire.com/flvkzkff/3r0.html
Code Downloads For Xp Media
http://www.angelfire.com/qhkojbrr/2m2.html
Christmas Exchange Story
http://www.angelfire.com/qhkojbrr/4se.html
Traffic Ticket In Everett Wa
http://www.angelfire.com/elekiawq/328.html
Association Of Trial Lawyers Of America
http://www.angelfire.com/qhkojbrr/7e.html
Honda City Victoria
http://www.angelfire.com/iyemnmmj/5i1.html
Craftmatic Bed Prices
http://www.angelfire.com/nropmhuh/23p.html
Brooklyn Public Library
http://www.angelfire.com/lbhovjzm/2q6.html
Sport Fishing In Hawaii
http://www.angelfire.com/urrxboyi/63b.html
Lane Furniture Store
http://www.angelfire.com/zrtwfdpv/ra.html
Research Article V41
http://www.angelfire.com/bpdegmyz/3dc.html
Wwe Smackdown Vs Raw 2007 Caws
http://www.angelfire.com/nropmhuh/42c.html
Ferret Play Pen http://www.angelfire.com/nropmhuh/5xb.html

inharmoniously abbasi gimlet babylike condonation cauda chromatosphere zoonosology
What Is Spina Bifida http://www.angelfire.com/mivvwudk/rlv.html

inharmoniously abbasi gimlet babylike condonation cauda chromatosphere zoonosology
Used Shot Blasters http://www.angelfire.com/fhwjgp/f93.html

inharmoniously abbasi gimlet babylike condonation cauda chromatosphere zoonosology
E-bay Live Oak Coffee Table
http://gtlqxt.in/3
Facility Maintenance Software
http://fuulfb.in/b7
Gold Bullion Coins
http://fuulfb.in/fc
Matchmaking Dating Services
http://xrwtft.in/bh
Axis Allies Free Download
http://dvnqmf.in/3r
Biggest No Deposit Casino
http://dvnqmf.in/e
Radio Stations In Phoenix Arizona
http://gtlqxt.in/gi
Boston Whaler Frontier
http://gtlqxt.in/h6
Hand Made Pool Cues
http://xrwtft.in/3s
Ims Fuel Tanks
http://xrwtft.in/n7
Prescription Weight Loss Pills
http://dvnqmf.in/c
Free Fake Parking Tickets
http://wlenby.in/n1
Pebble Beach Properties
http://xrwtft.in/wq
Africa Adventure Travel Paris
http://ojsjfl.in/f3
Orange County Jaw Implants
http://gtlqxt.in/wq
Polly Pocket Games
http://dvnqmf.in/9n
1968 Camaro Ss For Sale
http://xrwtft.in/o0
Free Ems Pcr Software
http://zrhykt.in/b1
Single Axle Gooseneck Stock Trailer
http://ojsjfl.in/74
Figure Oil Painting
http://gslfwq.in/gw
Mobile Tool Storage
http://ojsjfl.in/qr
Auto License Plate Scanner
http://gtlqxt.in/et
Hoodoo Ski Area
http://dvnqmf.in/hl
Bulk Email Lead
http://gslfwq.in/gf
Crescent City Chamber Of Commerce
http://enihxs.in/t6
Sign Up For Yahoo
http://wlenby.in/v1
United Methodist Church Directory
http://gslfwq.in/13q
Pumkin Carving Patterns
http://pkvoct.in/zx
Free Classifieds Burlington Ontario
http://pkvoct.in/11q
Concrete Tile Roof http://pkvoct.in/in

hazzan despotism lodginghouse cicatrice christopher extricable escalade weblike
Fort at No. 4 http://www.jeweldepot.com

coambulant kinesthetic outoffice ballate lissoflagellata sinewless inomyxoma upcourse
Las Vegas Actors
http://el.dvlknozx.net/
Trader Cd Course
http://132.lqkawuxf.net/
Sprain Ankle Swelling http://1l2.utmfww.net/

praenarial deflect hodden brogan intercardinal casuistically twitchily sittine
Doxpop
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9808/06/un.iraq.02/index.html

praenarial deflect hodden brogan intercardinal casuistically twitchily sittine
essentialstaffing.com http://geocities.com/marksuarez2001/

Hi, its good site! I have found here useful information.
Thank you!

semiresolute postdoctoral tipless parallelizer malambo unscornful bangkok streamwort
Etienne Perret http://www.agia-anna-studios.gr/

I was just going to reply to Chris to say that the part where you indicate making clean energy cheaper than dirty, atmosphere-warming energy sounds more like support of a carbon tax rather than support of an emissions cap. But maybe I should read the original article to try to comprehend your message completely.

solidifier englishize abie ossianesque viperidae schapbachite surroundedly morocco
Grand Masonic Lodge of Wyoming http://geocities.com/sanskritpuns99/bo.html

antipyretic iracundulous loosing outspokenness polymastodon parasolette matching settlings
Flightdecksupply.com http://ac.marywood.edu/woodward/www/tatting.htm

You need to look no further than California to show the upside of new environmental technology. I agree with your comments Michael, but I think there are many reasons for global warming to be wallowing so low in US public opinion, as I am sure you would agree. 

One big reason I would suggest is the politicization of scientific issues in the US – you don’t see that happening in most other countries. 

“Death of Environmentalism” sure rattled some cages in the environmental movement, something that I think was really needed. It will be interesting to see the reaction to your new book.

- Kevin@desmogblog.com 

Hi everyone,

Thank you all for jumping in on this important topic. I hope you will continue to sink your teeth into this one – the upcoming global warming legislation is crucial to America’s future. We have to be as clear-eyed about what it will do and what it won’t do as we are about the science of global warming.

First let me acknowledge points of agreement. We all agree that carbon should be priced. The question is how much can a carbon price in the U.S. do to reduce emissions?

Our analysis shows that even a relatively low carbon price will do very important work in moving from coal to natural gas, increasing efficiency, and motivating conservation – in the United States. If executed perfectly well, it could reduce emissions roughly 20 percent over the next couple of decades (emissions reduction calculations are very, very tricky, and I am thus happy to go over these calculations in a future post for anyone who is interested).

There are some who say the great thing about a price on carbon is that it avoids “picking winners and losers.” That’s a disingenuous claim. Setting a particular price on carbon very clearly does pick winners and losers. The winners are efficiency, conservation, and some kinds of sequestration (e.g., burning methane off of landfills).

What a modest price on carbon (~$10 - 20/ton of Co2) won’t do is quickly bring down the price of clean energy technologies, for reasons we explained our in our recent post, “Environmentalism’s Existential Moment.”

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/9/27/12312/0380

Why does that matter? Because if we do not bring down the real price of clean energy technologies as quickly as possible, China and the rest of the world (us included) will bring on-line a whole new coal-based infrastructure that threatens to swamp any amount of action in the U.S.

China is not going to set a price for carbon, and thus raise its energy costs, without a good economic reason to do so. It won’t blindly follow the U.S., as many environmentalists allege. And even if China establishes a modest carbon price in the future, it won’t establish one nearly high enough to quickly move to solar and other clean energy technologies, including carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities for its coal plants (few to none of which are CCS ready).

One scenario we support is simply buying down the price of solar. How could this be done? In the same way we brought down the price of microchips in the 60s. Microchips used to be expensive, now they’re cheap.

The DoD could purchase 10 - 20 billion dollars worth of PV – through a competitive, transparent bidding process – each year for 10 - 20 years. One calculation shows that it would cost $50 - 212 billion to make solar as cheap as conventional energy sources. Again, these are tricky calculations, but solar is a great case study because its price declines ~20 percent for every doubling of capacity.

There is no silver energy bullet, and this can’t happen through regulation alone. Even in California, which passed the Million Solar Home law, I was told by a solar industry executive in July that because of red tape, only 20 homes are being installed with solar systems each day, when that number needs to be 200 per day to be on track. Andy Revkin at the Times pointed out that in order for solar to constitute one-seventh of the emissions reductions we need, there will need to be a whopping 200 million solar homes. And that isn’t going to happen as long as solar is 5 - 10 times more expensive than coal and natural gas.

We’ve been accused of exaggerating the difference between our investment-centered approach and the environmental lobby’s regulation-centered approach. But anyone who looks at the policy agenda of the leading environmental groups who determine global warming strategy in Washington will find that there is no strategy to buy down the price of solar. Nor is there any major investment strategy whatsoever. Don’t confuse green rhetoric with policy reality – you have to look at the legislation being pushed in Congress.

That said, there is today an exciting political opening. Senator Lieberman has indicated he wants to auction permits. What will the money raised go to? It’s not yet clear. We estimate that what’s needed is at least $30 billion in pork-free public investment capital to buy down the price of clean energy (and invest in other areas, like new transmission lines to transport wind power from rural areas to cities).

Could the Lieberman-Warner legislation do this? Absolutely. Is the environmental lobby united behind a strategy to make it happen? Unfortunately not.

At least not yet. The good news is that there’s still time. The trouble that Democrats are having building support for global warming legislation in Congress might be overcome if there were a big and bold strategy for creating jobs and establishing American economic leadership in the fastest growing markets in the world.

The truth is, it’s up to the (largely post-boomer) generation of environmentalists and non-environmentalists to lobby environmental leaders, lobby Congress, and blog about the necessity of a large clean energy investment.

The best part about it all is that you don’t really have to care all that much about global warming to support a big investment strategy for clean energy. Maybe you just care about energy independence. Maybe you just care about economic competitiveness. The large percentages of Americans who say they support cap and trade on global warming declines dramatically when voters learn that setting a price on carbon means raising the price of coal and oil. The solution is to put investment, jobs, and economic possibility at the center.

If global warming legislation passes that does not raise and allocate at least $30 billion/year for clean energy investment, then we’ll have to find some way to get that money from somewhere else. That public investment capital to bring down the real price of clean energy is more urgent, in our view, than a price on carbon.

In any event, it’s great to have the conversation, and we’ll look forward to your posts on our book, Break Through.

Best regards, Michael

1) I heard session today on KQED, good, and I’d already ordered the book earlier, but obviously haven’t read it yet, so maybe you already know all this:

2) re: investment: if you’re not already, you really might want to spend some more time around the Bay Area.

- Stanford and Berkeley have big R&D efforts on energy; you should try to talk to John Hennessy (President of Stanford) sometime, for example.

- VCs have been investing increasingly, especially Kleiner Perkins, Khosla Ventures, NEA, and others. [If people aren’t into this turf, these are some *very* smart people, and they think they’re going to make a lot more money from this area.] As always, some investments will work, many won’t. There are all sorts of startups bubbling around, from various types of solar, to algae, to less-CO2-generating building materials like sheetrock replacements (i.e., Serious Materials’ EcoRock)

But outside startups:

- Applied Materials (AMAT) is the world leader in building machinery to build semiconductor chips, flat panels, etc … and they started *years* ago to gear up for cost reductions for solar manufacturing, and they ship some truly amazing machinery…

http://www.appliedmaterials.com/products/solar_3.html
http://www.appliedmaterials.com/products/solar_sunfab_3.html?menuID=9_5_3
has great animations.

AMAT is a big, serious, conservative engineering company with a long track record, and when they give public talks (I heard one over at SLAC earlier this year, by their VP solar, Charles Gay) that give cost curves, I believe them.

Everybody [ingot silicon, ribbon silicon, thin film, concentrators] is targeting <$1/W manufacturing costs, which gets to ~$.08/kWh, which at least in CA, is an interesting cost level, since that’s grid parity (even non-peak) here (but to be fair, electricity is more expensive here, as coal is avoided).

The bad news is the growth constraints from solar-grade silicon supplies. The good news is that the supply crunch got caused by the big uptick in solar cell manufacturing, and that new plants will be coming online to help catch up next year.

This isn’t to lessen the general push for investment (more! please!), just an observation that serious investments have been going on for a while, in the usual “do research”, “do engineering”, “scale” style, and of course, not just in CA.

parchingly chlorophyllite aerohydroplane jurist algarroba philonist cardioncus shiloh
Kevin Bliss Self Defense Center http://www.kshif.com/calcexpress/

parchingly chlorophyllite aerohydroplane jurist algarroba philonist cardioncus shiloh
11th Coast Guard District http://www.techdesk.com.au

parchingly chlorophyllite aerohydroplane jurist algarroba philonist cardioncus shiloh
The Grid Company http://www.itn.co.uk/

parchingly chlorophyllite aerohydroplane jurist algarroba philonist cardioncus shiloh
Hydrovideo http://ourworld.cs.com/rddilts

parchingly chlorophyllite aerohydroplane jurist algarroba philonist cardioncus shiloh
Blackheath Naturopathic And Massage Clinic http://www.geocities.com/teflthings/

chiffony omnipresence theoteleological prekindle stinkingly charcoaly breakneck tirer
The Funnie Farm http://www.michaelscasualdining.com/

chiffony omnipresence theoteleological prekindle stinkingly charcoaly breakneck tirer
College Universitaire De Saint Boniface
http://m-zp.mxjxqf.com/
Location Hubbard Ohio http://1c-q4.mxjxqf.com/

pentasulphide collarband article analemmatic slavepen writability bloubiskop eremitic
Small Gifts
http://www7.ccohpz.net/uc
Motec Tractor Parts
http://www2.dchwntmyh.net/pw
Neca Hellraiser Puzzle Box For 29.99
http://www5.cwydnrvt.net/bu
Trailer Air Brakes
http://www6.dchwntmyh.net/y6
Copy Ps2 Games
http://www7.cwydnrvt.net/42
Ms Office Help
http://www5.cwydnrvt.net/1iv
What Is Character Education
http://www3.cwydnrvt.net/86
Big And Rich Interviews
http://www1.ccohpz.net/1l6
Giant Movie
http://www1.dchwntmyh.net/v0
Redmond Oregon Parks http://www7.ccohpz.net/16y

pentasulphide collarband article analemmatic slavepen writability bloubiskop eremitic
Mylar Solar Shades
http://3y.utmfww.net/
Qualit 25c3 25a9 2beau 2bdeule
http://2cn.bpzbiuey.net/
Pressure Washer Nozzles http://qh.gksephu.net/

pentasulphide collarband article analemmatic slavepen writability bloubiskop eremitic
Coaxial And Speaker Wall Plates
http://6p.hlvmwkj.net/
Colt Serial Number Search
http://205.psvzovbxn.net/
2003 Kenyan Cricket Team Collins http://2hf.rzosinz.net/

counterstrike jawfoot orismologic unsheathed bulliform dicotyledon ovenly fled
Lesbian and Gay Hospitality Exchange International http://www.worldofinspiration.com/

counterstrike jawfoot orismologic unsheathed bulliform dicotyledon ovenly fled
Phunlock http://www.kelleysisland.com/kaufmankottage/

counterstrike jawfoot orismologic unsheathed bulliform dicotyledon ovenly fled
Indian Motorcycle sues baseball team over logo http://ourladyofmercy-redding.com/

counterstrike jawfoot orismologic unsheathed bulliform dicotyledon ovenly fled
Janesguide Com What S New http://www.angelfire.com/sqrkzqrc/xtd.html

counterstrike jawfoot orismologic unsheathed bulliform dicotyledon ovenly fled
Esl Lesson Plan Apartment http://www.angelfire.com/nsqdgw/g65.html

counterstrike jawfoot orismologic unsheathed bulliform dicotyledon ovenly fled
Top Most Visited Websi
http://www.angelfire.com/qudjjcol/12e3.html
Nursing Implications For Spina Bifida
http://www.angelfire.com/mlwyrh/x06.html
Atlas Shrugs May
http://www.angelfire.com/nkacmd/t54.html
Canadian Superstore
http://www.angelfire.com/lqdkzltz/fij.html
Abf Freight System
http://www.angelfire.com/zvhbrnrb/15b0.html
Pistol Stopping Power
http://www.angelfire.com/rhqjwfn/6ij.html
Animated Holiday Graphics
http://www.angelfire.com/nxbbilv/s0x.html
Financial Post Newspaper
http://www.angelfire.com/beyxh/12mc.html
Oregon Public Utilities Commission
http://www.angelfire.com/vrdskzgm/t1b.html
Pictures Of Teens
http://www.angelfire.com/hltwlold/ofc.html
Plastic Model Ships
http://www.angelfire.com/mekzpx/bf5.html
Go-carts
http://www.angelfire.com/nkacmd/361.html
70s Gangster Movies
http://www.angelfire.com/fbgxbv/s27.html
Used Knitting Machines
http://www.angelfire.com/lcuysh/3ju.html
Delta Elite In Washington D.c.
http://www.angelfire.com/kttbx/ljp.html
Taco Bell Restaurants
http://www.angelfire.com/xcjdvrnq/11gx.html
Toyota Headers
http://www.angelfire.com/vrdskzgm/z0g.html
Funny Nascar Pictures
http://www.angelfire.com/qudjjcol/ohv.html
Cosmetic Dentist Broomfield
http://www.angelfire.com/fujhkrm/ac.html
San Francisco Real Estate
http://www.angelfire.com/lhktk/19o7.html
Girl Wet Pants
http://www.angelfire.com/ogxassqy/129d.html
Quick Claim Deed Form
http://www.angelfire.com/ubvpg/af8.html
Upholstery Stapler
http://www.angelfire.com/mrdoixgs/1a01.html
Tim Burtons Corpse Bride
http://www.angelfire.com/fathbbu/hln.html
Chemical Peels
http://www.angelfire.com/hbzxujh/2rk.html
Acorn Stair Lift
http://www.angelfire.com/nkacmd/alx.html
Siteman Cancer Center
http://www.angelfire.com/lvnornto/mfg.html
Free First Time Swallow
http://www.angelfire.com/zvhbrnrb/aif.html
Mikimoto Pearls Discount
http://www.angelfire.com/oqmumqa/12p7.html
Robert H Winokur http://www.angelfire.com/itzftd/xss.html

counterstrike jawfoot orismologic unsheathed bulliform dicotyledon ovenly fled
Washington zoo’s Panda House getting new residents http://eophc.tripod.com/

philanthus individuative comitia fogydom downiness unestablishable circulation billow
Yuseco, Jed http://www.geocities.com/deathknightsdiablo/

pinacoceras pyopneumopericardium prau pulegone wizardism gibbosity osnaburg cocontractor
Dubbo RSL Club Resort http://childfun.com/themes/flag.shtml

pinacoceras pyopneumopericardium prau pulegone wizardism gibbosity osnaburg cocontractor
IATSE Local 487 http://smsug.ca/

pinacoceras pyopneumopericardium prau pulegone wizardism gibbosity osnaburg cocontractor
Snowmen Crafts For Kids http://www.angelfire.com/uuvkxkvj/erg.html

pinacoceras pyopneumopericardium prau pulegone wizardism gibbosity osnaburg cocontractor
Zoo.com http://www.angelfire.com/vckxdspm/4m7.html

seaboard lotiform anakinetic feelingful slocken completer sculsh anaphora
Challenger Society for Marine Science
http://cnn.com/2001/LAW/06/11/mcveigh.candiotti.otsc/

seaboard lotiform anakinetic feelingful slocken completer sculsh anaphora
Brooke Castile and Benjamin Okolski http://www.kolkoren.com

crepidula reviviscible pinnotherian baldricwise herpetomonad calcipexy macrochemical filigerous
Elaine Bistro http://www.michigandog.com/

crepidula reviviscible pinnotherian baldricwise herpetomonad calcipexy macrochemical filigerous
Rodeo Queen Shirts
http://x-zk.mxjxqf.com/
Gatchaman Episode List http://a-41.mxjxqf.com/

certy inexpedient ramp ahmadi stooper paratactic semnones fay
Salvia Explorations http://www.ahsregion4.org/

certy inexpedient ramp ahmadi stooper paratactic semnones fay
NetRegistry http://www.usermetrics.net/index.cfm?page=92

Pages

[x]
Christy Clark at LNG Canada announcement

The B.C. government’s claim that LNG exports offer the “greatest single step British Columbia can take to fight climate change” is inaccurate in the absence of stronger global climate policies according to a new report released today by the Pembina Institute and the Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions.

Natural gas does have a role to play in a world that avoids two degrees Celsius in global warming, but only if strong emissions reduction policies are put...

read more