Did you know that beetles, barnacles, pikas, pine warblers, and many other
species are already on the move due to global warming? How much more will
they need to move, and how quickly, to keep pace with global warming over
the next century? Which species will be able to survive our shifting
climate? Which may not? And what can we do?

A new study by a team of scientists, including Dr. Healy Hamilton, director
of the Center for Applied Biodiversity Informatics at the California Academy
of Sciences, offers some answers to these questions. The Hamilton lab has
been developing new methods to forecast climate change impacts to species'
geographic ranges for conservation planning.

If you are in the San Francisco Bay Area on January 12, Dr. Hamilton will
give a talk entitled "Forecasting Climate Change Impacts to Species
Distributions and the Implications for Conservation Planning" at the Center
for Biological Diversity. (For details go to:
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/action/events/index.html) The
presentation will cover her cutting-edge work and how the study's results
underscore the importance of curbing carbon pollution; it will also provide
data for conservationists who must now make plans to deal with the impacts
of global warming.

Dr. Hamilton's team has calculated that on average, ecosystems will need to
shift about a quarter mile per year to keep pace with changing temperatures
across the globe. And flatter ecosystems, such as flooded grasslands,
mangroves, and deserts, will need to move much more rapidly -- sometimes
more than a kilometer per year.

Dr. Hamilton projects that only 8% of our current protected areas have
residence times of more than 100 years. She told Science Daily, "If we want
to improve these numbers, we need to both reduce our carbon emissions and
work quickly toward expanding and connecting our global network of protected
areas." That's part of the reason why the polar bear critical habitat
designation now pending is so important and the work to protect other arctic
species, like penguins, is crucial.

This week, The Center for Biological Diversity and Turtle Island Restoration
Network filed a formal notice that they intend to sue the Obama
administration for illegally delaying protection of penguins under the
Endangered Species Act. The Department of the Interior failed to meet the
December 19, 2009 legal deadline to finalize the listings of seven penguin
species that are threatened by climate change and industrial fisheries.
Until the listings are finalized, these penguins will not receive the
Endangered Species Act protections they need to recover.

"While sea ice melts away and the oceans warm, the Obama administration is
frozen in inaction. Instead of protecting penguins and taking meaningful
steps to address global warming," said Shaye Wolf, a biologist with the
Center for Biological Diversity, "our government is dragging its feet while
penguins are marching toward extinction.

Eric, Dongsheng and Bill have safely made it to the South Pole!

The end of another year and, depending on how you calculate it, the end of
another decade, means time for reflection and resolutions.and reflections on
past resolutions.

The end of the year on climate issues culminated in Copenhagen. The
Copenhagen climate conference is now history, but as many have noted,
including the Center for Biological Diversity, the repercussions of the
world's failure to adopt measures stronger than the so-called Copenhagen
Accord may haunt us for some time.

Below are some excerpts from the Center's last entry in their Copenhagen
blog, "On Thin Ice". For the Center's full perspective on what we needed,
what we got and why, and what happens next, go to:
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/climate_law_institute/350_or_bus
t/copenhagen/what_happened_in_copenhagen.html

News reports in the closing hours told a dramatic story: President Obama
crashed a secret meeting among the heads of a few rapidly industrializing
nations and came out of the meeting with an agreement that saved the talks
from collapse. Behind these reports, however, lies an infinitely more
complex - and far more troubling - reality. Ultimately, the Copenhagen
Accord reflects rather than resolves deep conflicts: divisions between
developed and developing nations, deepening rivalries among economic
competitors, and the vast distance between the emission reductions necessary
to avert disaster and the steps the world's largest emitters of greenhouse
gases are willing to take.

What We Needed: A Strong, Binding International Agreement

Scientists agree that emissions must peak within the next decade and decline
steeply thereafter. What we needed in Copenhagen was a meaningful, science
based, fair, and binding international agreement. We needed firm emissions
reduction targets and firm achievement dates, including ambitious short-term
targets. We also needed firm funding commitments and financing mechanisms to
assist the least developed but hardest hit countries in adapting to the
severe environmental changes.

What We Got: A Fill-in-the-Blanks "Accord"

The Accord nominally sets a goal of holding global temperature increases
below 2 degrees Celsius, but does not contain the targets necessary to
achieve this goal. In fact, it does not specify any targets or achievement
dates at all, but rather leaves those targets as blanks to be filled in by
the end of January 2010. Nothing in the Accord makes these fill-in-the-blank
targets legally binding.

And, if participating countries bring the targets they brought to the
conference, there is no way they can meet even the stated 2 degrees Celsius
goal, much less the more scientifically defensible 1.5 degrees Celsius goal
that the Accord states should be studied further. According to a scientific
analysis, these targets would put the world on a path toward exceeding a 3
degrees Celsius temperature increase, committing our planet to catastrophic
and irreversible climate change.

Why We Got What We Got: A Global(ized) Game of Chicken

The blame game is in full swing. Many quite understandably fault the United
States, which brought embarrassingly weak targets and an unwillingness to
enter a binding commitment, and then refused to improve those targets even
as the conference approached collapse. Others point the finger at China and
other rapidly industrializing nations, which do not want to lose economic
advantages that they are just beginning to enjoy - especially at the behest
of wealthy, industrial nations that have enjoyed the same advantages for
decades, pumping the atmosphere full of carbon in the process. And even the
small island states and others are assigned blame for their pursuit of
stringent, science-based emission reduction targets that sometimes brought
the consensus-based process to a halt.

There is plenty of blame to go around. Global dynamics aside, it is
impossible to deny that domestic politics in the United States cast a long
shadow in Copenhagen.

This is the resolution part: Mexico City, Washington, and Your Hometown
By the end of January 2010, at least some countries presumably will have
filled in the Accord's blank spaces with promised but nonbinding emissions
targets. The next climate conference will take place at the end of 2010 in
Mexico City.

Meanwhile, in Washington, Congress will continue to debate - or avoid
debating - a number of climate bills, all of them far weaker than the
science demands. But 2010 is an election year, and many - smarting from the
rancorous healthcare debate - have already expressed reluctance to take on
another big, contentious issue.

More promising, although under threat by climate-science deniers and others,
is the Environmental Protection Agency's burgeoning effort to regulate
greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. EPA recently released a
powerful finding that greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks endanger
public health and welfare by contributing to climate change. If EPA were to
make similar findings for other greenhouse gas sources - which both science
and the law compel - the stage would be set for comprehensive regulation and
reduction of emissions. Seeking to use the most powerful tools available
under the Act, the Center for Biological Diversity and 350.org recently
petitioned EPA to set a science-based nationwide cap on greenhouse gas
concentrations in the atmosphere. One hundred other conservation
organizations and scientists have since signed on in support of the
petition.

The Copenhagen Accord leaves a tremendous amount of work to be done. Let's
get busy.

With each drink, we take in a small part of this place. It is coursing through our veins and sweated out our pores. We ski and sleep on snow. Each cool gulp of air fills alveoli with oxygen from the most remote place on earth We are not so much skiing to the South Pole as into it.

We are becoming Antarctica.

Obviously, the big news last week was Copenhagen and what did or did not
happen. Wanted to share with you a short post on the fall out from our
allies at the Center for Biological Diversity and also think about what
needs to come next.

From the Center:
Let's start with the good: The "good" is actually not found in the accord,
but rather in the birth of a diverse global movement for climate justice
that is demanding real solutions that get us down to 350 parts per million
of carbon dioxide - demands made with a collective voice growing ever louder
and more unified.

Turning to the bad: The 12-paragraph "Copenhagen Accord" might actually
better be termed the Copenhagen "press release".because it's about as
binding.
In the end, rather than "adopting" the accord, delegates only "noted" its
existence. As one commentator said, remarking on the "accord's" existence,
it reads like a preamble to a treaty that was supposed to be agreed upon in
Copenhagen but was not.

The bad also lies in the way in which this so-called accord was reached,
with the United States sticking to a take-it-or-leave-it proposition that
put vulnerable countries in even weaker bargaining positions. As the
Center's press release noted: "We cannot make truly meaningful and historic
steps with the United States pledging to reduce CO2 emissions by only 3
percent below 1990 levels by 2020. The science demands far more."

The Ugly: Perhaps the gravest problem with the Copenhagen accord is that it
sets a goal of limiting warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius but fails
to provide the targeted reductions to meet that goal - even if those
voluntary targets were in fact completely achieved.

The accord simply reiterates the emissions reduction targets already on the
table before Copenhagen, most notably the United States' meager and frankly
embarrassing pledge to reduce emissions just 3 percent below 1990 levels by
2020.

Preliminary calculations by a team of experts led by an MIT professor found
that under the accord, even if fully implemented despite its voluntary
structure, the average global temperature is likely to rise 3.2 degrees
Celsius.

To go along with the weak and unenforceable pledges, the accord also fails
because it does not set a target date where emissions would peak and then
decline, which ideally would be around 2015.

United Nations climate chief Yvo de Boer stated: "It is very critical that
you get a peak and a decline starting soon.The opportunity to actually make
it into the scientific window of opportunity is getting smaller and
smaller."

Summing it all up, Andrew Watson, a professor at the University of East
Anglia in Britain, said: "From the evidence of the last two weeks, I would
say we have a heck of a long way still to go if, as a species, we are to
avoid the fate that usually afflicts populations that outgrow their
resources."
We better get busy making the most of the "good."

We're Not Done Yet:

So what's next? A number of groups, including the Center for Biological
Diversity, Greenpeace, 350.org, Avaaz, 1Sky, Amnesty International and
others, have joined together as part of the tck tck tck alliance to unify
their web site's home pages. The goal: to demonstrate their extreme
disappointment with the outcome at Copenhagen, and to send the message that
we are united, and we are not done yet.

While the United Nations climate negotiations may have ended, we don't have
the fair, science-based, and legally binding treaty that millions of people
worldwide have demanded. What we do have is a global movement of people who
aren't going to go away until our demands are met.

These groups are asking everyone to pledge that in 2010, you'll join
millions of others in working for a fair, science-based, and legally binding
treaty that truly solves the grave problem of global warming before it's
simply too late.

You can sign onto the Center's pledge at:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2167/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=19
38

The Copenhagen accord is not the best we can do, and it's not nearly good
enough. We stand at the precipice of climatic tipping points beyond which
we'll face a climate crash out of our control. We cannot make truly
meaningful and historic steps globally with the United States pledging to
reduce carbon dioxide emissions by only 3 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.
The science demands far more.

We know what must be done. We need a fair, legally binding international
agreement that returns levels of CO2 in our atmosphere to no higher than 350
parts per million. We need to take bold action in the coming months to make
this a reality.

As we write this, the Copenhagen climate talks are reaching a crescendo. On
Wednesday December 16, there was a walkout, groups such as Friends of the
Earth and Avaaz have been threatened with being banned from the Bella Center
headquarters, hundreds of people outside the Bella Center were clubbed and
tear-gassed as they tried to go in and participate in the proceedings, and
as this is written, there is a youth sit-in inside the Bella Center.

Why? Rather then getting us down to the science-based target of 350 ppm CO2
we need, current numbers on the table in Copenhagen are projected to put us
on a path to 750 ppm by the end of the century, and there is no agreement on
adequate financing to support developing nations in shifting to a
clean-energy economy or adapting to climate change.

Over the weekend, church bells rang across the globe at 3:50 p.m. in their
respective time zones, up to 100,000 people marched through the streets of
Copenhagen and about 1,000 were detained, and in San Francisco, a soggy,
stalwart band of Center for Biological Diversity supporters, along with
Organizing for America volunteers, Greenpeace, and the Mobilization for
Climate Justice, came together under a single banner: WE NEED A REAL DEAL IN
COPENHAGEN NOW!

What's a real deal? One that's ambitious and grounded in science, and that
means no more than 350 ppm of CO2. One that's just and fair, and that means
nations largely responsible for carbon pollution need to take the lead in
curbing that pollution and cleaning up the mess. And one that's binding,
meaning political promises without legally binding commitments won't fly.

Before the vigil in front of San Francisco's City Hall, organizers met with
the staff of Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein and delivered a
Center petition with nearly 30,000 signatures on it calling for 350 ppm,
maintaining all of the Clean Air Act's capacity to curb carbon pollution,
and eliminating or greatly reducing offsets.

They also delivered a letter from nearly 100 organizations
/www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/climate_law_institute/global_wa
rming_litigation/clean_air_act/sign-on_letter.html> supporting the Center
and 350.org's petition to the Environmental Protection Agency to cap carbon
pollution at no more than 350 ppm under the Clean Air Act's National Ambient
Air Quality Standards program. If you belong to an organization, please
consider asking your organization to sign on!

Already this week, Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowki announced that she will try
to reverse the progress made last week when the Environmental Protection
Agency found that greenhouse gases endanger public health. In response, the
Center for Biological Diversity's Executive Director Kieran Suckling said,
"It is a sad day when a United States senator attempts to stop a federal
agency from enforcing one of our nation's most successful and cost-effective
laws - the Clean Air Act." We need to vigilantly defend the Clean Air Act
-- the only existing tool that can ensure a truly science-based
greenhouse-pollution cap.

From the Senate offices, the SF group marched through a constant drizzle to
City Hall, passing several painfully cute holiday displays of polar bears as
they went. These holiday depictions could soon be the only polar bears left
on the planet if we don't translate our symbolic love of the bears into
concrete action to save their lives.

Take one minute to call the White House at (202) 456-1111 to let President
Barack Obama know the world is looking to him for bold leadership to take on
the greatest threat of our time: catastrophic global warming. Tell him we
must cut CO2 emissions by 45 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, rather than
the 3-percent cut he has pledged to take with him to Copenhagen.

Let's keep up the pressure till the end for a real deal in Denmark.

'The best day of the expedition,' was how Dongsheng described the day. Bill added, 'warm and beautiful.' With the Thiel mountains growing after every step and a deep blue sky, it was truly magnificent.

This is the Antarctica that makes us smile.

Today was special for another reason as we passed 85 degrees. We are now officially half way to the South Pole! We feel good about accomplishing that small goal. After all, it only took us 25 days to get here. Only.

When was the last time it took you 25 days to get anywhere let alone 25 days to get half way somewhere? In our increasingly faster world, it is refreshing for us to measure progress in days and weeks. So often we parse time into the smallest possible units, packing in more and more.

Here we can watch our shadows arc across the snow and even notice when the angle has changed. We ski towards distant mountains for days and watch them shrink behind us for, at times, weeks. In relation to the entire scale of our journey, it feels more like we are becoming a part of this landscape rather than simply traveling across it.

This makes us smile too.

In another few weeks or so we will know what it will feel like to be successful in reaching the pole or not. Until then, we will continue forward - enjoying small successes, bracing for hardships, and hopefully, understanding this place and it's effect on our lives.

On Tuesday, the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute released a report demonstrating that President Obama has clear legal authority to commit the United States to reducing greenhouse gas pollution.

The report, titled "Yes, He Can: President Obama's Power to Make an International Climate Commitment Without Waiting for Congress", concludes that the President need not wait for Congress to act before taking strong action to reduce U.S. emissions.

The report was released at an event hosted by Greenpeace at the conference site. The take away: President Obama's hands are not tied by Congress's lack of action or the grossly inadequate cap-and-trade bills currently under debate. President Obama can lead, rather than follow, by using his power under the Clean Air Act and other laws to achieve deep and rapid greenhouse emissions reductions from major polluters. The Constitution and existing domestic environmental laws give President Obama all the power he needs to join with other nations in making a real commitment to solve the climate crisis.

The report also details the President's broad authority to reduce domestic greenhouse gas emissions under existing environmental laws, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and National Environmental Policy Act. The release of the report follows an important finding by the Environmental Protection Agency issued earlier in the week that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare and the Center and 350.org's petition to the EPA of last week asking EPA to set a national pollution cap on greenhouse gases.

Remember, it's cool to be cold. Save the Poles. Save the planet.

For more information, please visit www.savethepoles.com

For information about guided Antarctic expeditions, please visit http://www.antarctic-logistics.com/

For media inquiries, please contact lora@screamagency.com

For technical inquires, please contact webexpeditions.net

A lot going on back at home and in Copenhagen.

Allies from the Center for Biological Diversity are in Copenhagen joining
tens of thousands of others there pushing for real action on climate change.
Monday's attendance was said to be 11,000, with more people arriving every
day.

On Tuesday, the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute
released a report demonstrating that President Obama has clear legal
authority to commit the United States to reducing greenhouse gas pollution.
The report, titled "Yes, He Can: President Obama's Power to Make an
International Climate Commitment Without Waiting for Congress", concludes
that the President need not wait for Congress to act before taking strong
action to reduce U.S. emissions.

The report was released at an event hosted by Greenpeace at the conference
site. The take away: President Obama's hands are not tied by Congress's
lack of action or the grossly inadequate cap-and-trade bills currently under
debate. President Obama can lead, rather than follow, by using his power
under the Clean Air Act and other laws to achieve deep and rapid greenhouse
emissions reductions from major polluters. The Constitution and existing
domestic environmental laws give President Obama all the power he needs to
join with other nations in making a real commitment to solve the climate
crisis.

The report cites prominent legal scholars and U.S. Supreme Court opinions
recognizing the President's broad power to make binding international
agreements that do not need to be ratified by a two-thirds majority vote in
the Senate. For example, the President could enter into either a
"congressional-executive" agreement under authority already granted by
Congress, or a "sole executive" agreement based on his own constitutional
powers. It cites agreements such as NAAFTA and the WTO that the US signed
without ratification of two-thirds of the Senate.

The report also details the President's broad authority to reduce domestic
greenhouse gas emissions under existing environmental laws, including the
Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and National
Environmental Policy Act. The release of the report follows an important
finding by the Environmental Protection Agency issued earlier in the week
that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare and the Center and
350.org's petition to the EPA of last week asking EPA to set a national
pollution cap on greenhouse gases.

You can follow the Center's work in Copenhagen on their blog "The World on
Thin Ice: The Center Live From Copenhagen 2009" at
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/climate_law_institute/350_or_bus
t/copenhagen/index.html

Didn't make it to Copenhagen? That's ok, because there is plenty to do
stateside.

On Thursday, December 10, President Obama will receive the Nobel Peace
Prize. Before he heads off to Copenhagen next week for the most important
international meeting on climate change ever, the Center for Biological
Diversity is asking everyone to take one minute to call the White House at
(202) 456-1111 to congratulate him on the Nobel Prize and to let him know
that the world's inhabitants -- people, animals, and plants -- are relying
on his bold leadership to bring with him to Copenhagen emissions reductions
targets of 45% or more below 1990 by 2020, rather than his current proposal
to reduce emissions only 3% below 1990 by 2020, which would lead to climate
catastrophe.

In addition to your calls, the Center will be delivering to the White House
and Senate offices petitions with nearly 30,000 signatures from people like
us calling for a climate agreement that sets an overall cap on atmospheric
carbon dioxide levels of no more than 350 parts per million; maintains and
uses all of the Clean Air Act's ability to regulate critical polluters; and
eliminates or greatly reduces offsets and other loopholes. It's essential
we get it right the first time. This may be our only chance.

Want even more to do? On Friday, December 11, 350.org is organizing vigils
around the world. Find one near you: http://www.350.org/weekend

This year more than any I can recall, my email is filled with information about ways to simplify the holidays, to green up my Christmas, to do more while using less. For those of us who already work hard to decrease our carbon footprint the reminders to avoid paper plates while entertaining, or to shop second hand for nearly new gifts seem very obvious. I have purchased my vintage buffet plates, set out cloth napkins rather than paper, turn down the heat just a little bit further each evening as we go to bed. But in the face of so many holiday traditions it is hard to balance less is more with our own desire to recreate what we remember growing up for our own families. I have no memory of my parents lamenting the over-packaging of toys as being environmentally unfriendly while we tore through the wrapping paper on Christmas morning. What I do remember the huge garbage bags on the curb the next day, filled to overflowing with wrap and boxes and tissue.

The Save The Poles philosophy is one that I keep reminding myself of as I stand in the store deliberating over a myriad of choices; is it recycled? Locally grown? Fair trade? Honestly, I could make puppets out of old socks for gifts, but for children whose lists start and end with items like new Wii games it would be a less than Merry Christmas.

Begin with one step. For the past few years at our house, it means buying no tissue paper, and reusing gift bags over and over again. We purchase our turkey from a local butcher, and have led lights on the house. The coffee we drink is fair trade and the beer is brewed not far from our home. Yes, there just might be new Wii games under the tree on Christmas morning, but Santa will leave them unwrapped. Santa might just also leave Wii remote batteries chargers in Christmas stockings along with hand knit socks. Each year we will strive to integrate more eco-friendly traditions, and I am certain that our holidays will be happy. I also know that we can all begin with one step to Save the Poles, and together we can save the planet.

Elisabeth Pletcher-Harincar

Save The Poles

Expedition Support

Back at home this week, The Center for Biological Diversity and 350.org took an historic step: they petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency to set national limits for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollution under the Clean Air Act. The petition seeks to have greenhouse gases designated as "criteria" air pollutants and atmospheric CO2 capped at 350 parts per million (ppm), the level leading scientists say is necessary to avoid the worst impacts of global warming.

"It's time to use our strongest existing tool for reducing greenhouse gas pollution - the Clean Air Act. The Act's provisions should cap carbon pollution at no more than 350 parts per million," said Kassie Siegel, an author of the petition and director of the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute. "For four decades, this law has protected the air we breathe - and it's done that through a proven, successful system of pollution control that saves lives and creates economic benefits vastly exceeding its costs."

Last week, in advance of the international climate negotiations in Copenhagen, the Obama administration proposed emissions reduction targets of just 3 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, far below the cuts of approximately 45 percent necessary to get back to 350 ppm. The current atmospheric CO2 level is approximately 385 ppm. The administration argues that its hands are tied by the weak cap-and-trade bills passed by the House of Representatives and under consideration by the Senate. This Clean Air Act petition, however, demonstrates that the Obama administration already possesses the legal tools to achieve deep and rapid greenhouse emissions reductions from major polluters consistent with what science demands.

The UN's top climate scientist, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, endorsed reducing carbon in our atmosphere to no more than 350 ppm. NASA's top climate scientist James Hansen has long advocated the need to reach 350. "The science, unfortunately, is all too clear - 350 ppm is the most CO2 we can have in the atmosphere if we want a planet 'similar to the one on which civilization developed.' Around the world people have rallied around that number, in what CNN called 'the most widespread day of political action in the planet's history;' 92 national governments have endorsed it as a target. Now it's time for the nation that invented environmentalism to use its most progressive set of laws in the same effort," said Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org.

While the Obama administration is moving forward to reduce greenhouse pollution from automobiles and smokestacks under the Clean Air Act, two laudable and critically important steps, the administration to date has failed to implement other important and legally required provisions of the Act.

The petition seeks a national pollution cap for CO2 and other greenhouse pollutants through a central provision of the Clean Air Act requiring EPA to designate "criteria" air pollutants, set national pollution limits for these pollutants to protect the public health and welfare, and then assist the states in carrying out plans to reduce emissions from major sources to attain or maintain the national standards.

To date, EPA has designated six criteria pollutants: particle pollution (PM), ground-level ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and lead. The petition seeks the addition of seven greenhouse gases to the list, including CO2 with a cap of no more than 350 ppm, as well as designation and caps for methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); sulfur hexafluoride (SF6); and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3).

Setting science-based national pollution caps for these greenhouse gases would mark a critical step in the fight against global warming and add more tools to the Clean Air Act programs the Obama administration is beginning to implement. A national pollution cap for greenhouse gases would also activate and coordinate the efforts of all 50 states, all of which currently implement plans for the reduction of the existing criteria air pollutants, and 38 of which are already drafting or implementing climate action plans.

"The Clean Air Act is a bipartisan bill signed by a Republican president. Leading scientists at NASA and around the world say we need to get to 350 ppm. This petition simply asks EPA to do its job as science, the law, and common sense require," said McKibben. "Rather than perpetually wait for flawed and inadequate new climate legislation before taking meaningful action, the Obama administration can and must use the existing authorities under the Clean Air Act to set a target of 350 parts per million to protect the climate and our future," said Siegel.

The climate bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives, as well as legislation currently pending in the Senate, would eliminate EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act to designate greenhouse gases as criteria air pollutants and to set a cap on such emissions as requested in today's petition.

If you belong to a group, the Center and 350.org need your organization to stand with them by signing on to a letter of support that can be found at http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/climate_law_institute/global_warming_litigation/clean_air_act/sign-on_letter.html. Email your group's name, along with a contact person and title, to Rose Braz, the Center's climate campaign coordinator, at rbraz@biologicaldiversity.org

Now is the time to enforce the Clean Air Act - not gut it. Together, we can

save the Clean Air Act and put it to work to save our climate

Following the mapping, along with the blog posts and audio, is a great way to understand the scope of the journey that Eric, Bill and Dongsheng have undertaken. The map is updated each time an entry is sent in by the team.

Well, it's that time of year again. Thanksgiving -- when everyone in the
U.S. is supposed to be identifying what we are thankful for. I want to look
ahead and think about what I hope to be thankful for. I hope to be thankful
for the U.S. designating critical habitat for our beloved and imperiled
polar bears!!

A world without polar bears by the end of the century? That's what
scientists are predicting unless we take action now. As global warming
accelerates, the sea ice they depend on for survival is literally melting
away. If polar bears are to survive into the next century, we must do
everything we can to protect their sea ice habitat.

Global warming is melting Arctic sea ice at an alarming rate. Just
yesterday, a report by UN climate scientist found that arctic sea ice is
melting 40 percent faster than the panel estimated just a few years ago.
Every year more and more polar bears are starving and drowning as they have
to swim farther and farther to reach solid ice. Some are even turning to
cannibalism in a desperate search for food. Two-thirds of all polar bears -
including all bears in Alaska - will be extinct by 2050 if current trends
continue. The rest of the species will be gone by the end of the century.

Since the 1997 Kyoto agreement, the level of carbon dioxide pollution has
increased 6.5 percent, climate change has worsened and its impacts are
greater than anticipated. Once frozen summer Arctic sea ice now has open
ship passages. In Greenland and Antarctica, ice sheets have lost trillions
of tons of ice. Glaciers in Europe, South America, Asia and Africa are
shrinking faster than before.

Sea level has risen by about an inch and a half. Droughts and wildfires have
turned more severe worldwide. And the species impacted are so many that the
Center for Biological Diversity struggled to pare down the list to 350 for
its "350 Reasons we need to get to 350ppm: 350 Species Threatened by Global
Warming" web installation (http://350.biologicaldiversity.org).

The only way to prevent the complete loss of polar bears in the wild is to
aggressively tackle global warming and institute strong protections for
polar bear habitat to reduce other threats. Unfortunately, the Obama
administration has been slow on tackling global warming and worse on
protecting the polar bear's sea ice habitat.

In 2008, the Bush administration leased 2.7 million acres of prime polar
bear habitat in the Chukchi Sea off Alaska to oil companies. Now, not only
is the Obama administration defending these Bush-era leases, but Interior
Secretary Ken Salazar has issued permits to oil companies allowing
harassment of polar bears during oil exploration in the Chukchi and Beaufort
seas off Alaska, he has approved a new proposal to drill in the Beaufort Sea
next summer and is considering a similar proposal for the Chukchi Sea.

The good news is it's not too late to save the polar bear if we join
together and take immediate action. Thanks to a lawsuit by the Center for
Biological Diversity, the Obama administration has proposed designating more
than 200,000 square miles of Arctic coastline and sea ice as critical
habitat for the polar bear!

The administration is seeking comments on its proposed critical habitat now.
Please tell the Obama administration that the proposed critical habitat is
essential to the survival of the polar bear and that it must be protected
against threats from offshore oil and gas drilling. Take action with the
Center for Biological Diversity at
http://mail.google.com/mail/?hl=en&tab=wm#inbox/12527f22b04c90a1
to make sure we don't have to face a world without polar bears.

After one week on the ice Eric and the team are settling into a routine and have been updating the blog via audio most days. They plan on sending in podcasts in Mandarin as well as in English soon. Listen in to hear more about their journey to the South Pole.

After Eric left for the poles, the United States declared the odds of a binding agreement on global warming at Copenhagen on par with the odds of peace in the Middle East or resolution to College football's Bowl Championship Series controversy. While we can't give up on Copenhagen or what may follow, these latest developments make it clear that once again its time to put our hope in the Clean Air Act.

The Clean Air Act has protected the air we breathe for four decades. By curbing air pollution, it is directly responsible for saving many thousands of lives, improving health, and decreasing hospitalizations, illness, and lost school and work days. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) projects that in 2010 alone, the Clean Air Act will save 23,000 lives and prevent 1.7 million asthma attacks, 4.1 million lost work days, and over 68,000 hospitalizations and emergency room visits.

The Act has achieved these successes while saving us money and protecting our economy. In its first two decades alone, it created benefits valued at $22.2 trillion, 42 times greater than the estimated costs of its regulations.

Despite this success and despite the success that will come when the Environmental Protection Agency starts using the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas pollution, the Clean Air Act is under attack.

Both the house and senate global warming bills bar EPA from setting an overall cap on the amount of carbon pollution that may exist in the ambient air under the Act's National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) provision. Now, more than ever, is the time to enforce the Clean Air Act, not to gut it.

The Road Map to 350ppm: The Clean Air Act

The scientific consensus is clear: we must reduce the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide, or CO2, to 350 parts per million (ppm) or below to avoid global catastrophe. To reach 350ppm, greenhouse gas pollution from the United States and other developed countries should be reduced by 45% or more below 1990 levels by 2020, yet the Senate climate legislation would only reduce emissions by 4% below 1990 levels by 2020. The House bill set even weaker targets.

Clearly, pending legislation is not going to get us to 350ppm, but the Clean Air Act could. In fact, the Clean Air Act is our only existing environmental law that could get us to 350ppm and here's how it could be done:

The critically important 2007 U.S. Supreme Court case Massachusetts vs. the Environmental Protection Agency, makes clear that the Clean Air Act requires EPA to reduce greenhouse pollution.

Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is required to set a limit on the total amount of greenhouse gas pollution different sources such as coal fired power plants, oil refineries, cement factories, may emit. Thus, each type of facility must meet the same minimum standards. The standards are set based on the "best" system of emissions reduction that has been "adequately demonstrated." This part of the Clean Air Act works particularly well to speed the development and deployment of new technologies or reduce pollution (New Source Performance Standards.)

Under the Clean Air Act, all new or modified major sources of greenhouse gas pollution are required to adopt pollution control measures through a permitting system. Thus, for example, each new or modified coal-fired power plant, oil refinery or nitric acid plant, would be required to go through a permitting process and show that the proposed facility will use the best available control technology for each pollutant. (New Source Review Program.)

And the Clean Air Act's criteria air pollutant program adds a critically important tool to reduce substances which the EPA has designated as "criteria" pollutants. For each criteria air pollutant, the EPA sets a cap - such as 350 ppm -- on the amount of that pollutant that may exist in the ambient air. EPA specifies the total permissible amount of the pollutant based on what is necessary to protect the public health and welfare. To date the EPA has designated six criteria pollutants, but greenhouse gasses, including carbon dioxide, methane and others, are not yet designated as criteria pollutants and thus not yet subject to a cap under the Clean Air Act. (National Ambient Air Quality Standards.)

Save the Clean Air Act

92% of respondents to a recent survey by the Yale Project on Climate Change said the nation needs to act to reduce global warming. The same survey found that 80% of respondents said government should regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. And the top two reasons cited for the need for government action were: providing a better life for our children and grandchildren (66%) and saving many plant and animal species from extinction (65%).

The Clean Air Act provides a comprehensive system of pollution control with a proven track record of success for the grave problem of global warming and carbon pollution that can work now or with new climate legislation. Now is the time to enforce the Clean Air Act, not gut it.

For the link to all the things you can do, go to:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2167/t/5243/p/dia/action/public/index.sjs?action_KEY=1476 -

If you haven't yet written to your senators urging them to save the Clean Air Act, you can send a letter from this link.

Please call your senators and urge them to save the Clean Air Act -- the entire Clean Air Act. Personal calls from constituents make a big difference. Call (202) 224-3121 and ask for your senators' office, or visit https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2167/getLocal.jsp to look up your senators' contact information.

Visit your senators' district office. If you live in California, Oregon, Vermont, Nevada, or New Mexico, please join Center for Biological Diversity staff in meeting with your senators' district office staff to save the Clean Air Act. Space is limited; to reserve a spot or get more information, contact Climate Campaign Coordinator Rose Braz at rbraz@biologicaldiversity.org or (415) 436-9682 x 319.

Rose Braz

Center for Biological Diversity

Here, there are many ways to fail. Frostbite, injury from a fall, broken gear, not making enough miles, snow blindness, altitude sickness... To succeed requires an equally long list of skills and knowledge.

From the beginning of our training, I tried to emphasize finding systems to save energy, stay warm and be safe. Eating during our breaks can be more of an adventure than skiing. Clif bars, salami, cheese, a few pieces of candy, a chocolate bar all need to be consumed while hunkered down on your sled, wind howling, frozen goggles and parka ruff getting in everything.

Normally, I advise my team to put everything in different pockets and pull them out the appropriate times.

For Dong, this system didn't quite work. Food was frozen or hard to grab with big gloves. Enter new plan. Dong, now takes his daily allowance of nuts, energy bars, Clif shot bloks, cheese and whatever else he can find and breaks it up into small pieces until it fills an entire nalgene water bottle. Now at each break, he simply opens up the bottle and 'drinks' his snacks.

While Dong is the least experienced of our small group, his ability to observe, plan, modify and execute are critical polar skills. Bill and I are now anxiously awaiting Dong's next system overhaul.

Weather wise, tody was almost the exact opposite of yesterday. Good visibility, hard snow, even some sun in the afternoon. We made a beeline for the patriot hills covering 8.28 nautical milles in 5 hours.

Despite Dong's recent success in systems modification, his ability to judge our proximity to the nearby mountains needs work. "Three miles," he calculated.

For Dong, and most other polar novices, distances are difficult to judge due to the pristine quality of the air here.

Recently, the United States declared the odds of a binding agreement on global warming at Copenhagen on par with the odds of peace in the Middle East or resolution to College football's Bowl Championship Series controversy. While we can't give up on Copenhagen or what may follow, these latest developments make it clear that once again its time to put our hope in the Clean Air Act.

The Clean Air Act has protected the air we breathe for four decades. By curbing air pollution, it is directly responsible for saving many thousands of lives, improving health, and decreasing hospitalizations, illness, and lost school and work days. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) projects that in 2010 alone, the Clean Air Act will save 23,000 lives and prevent 1.7 million asthma attacks, 4.1 million lost work days, and over 68,000 hospitalizations and emergency room visits.

The Act has achieved these successes while saving us money and protecting our economy. In its first two decades alone, it created benefits valued at $22.2 trillion, 42 times greater than the estimated costs of its regulations.

Despite this success and despite the success that will come when the Environmental Protection Agency starts using the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas pollution, the Clean Air Act is under attack.

Both the house and senate global warming bills bar EPA from setting an overall cap on the amount of carbon pollution that may exist in the ambient air under the Act's National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) provision. Now, more than ever, is the time to enforce the Clean Air Act, not to gut it.

The Road Map to 350ppm: The Clean Air Act

The Clean Air Act provides a comprehensive system of pollution control with a proven track record of success for the grave problem of global warming and carbon pollution that can work now or with new climate legislation. Now is the time to enforce the Clean Air Act.

For the link to all the things you can do, go to:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2167/t/5243/content.jsp?content_KEY=3D663 5

Remember, it's cool to be cold. Save the Poles. Save the planet.

For more information, please visit Save The Poles.

For information about guided Antarctic expeditions, please visit ALE

For media inquiries, please contact Lora
For technical inquires, please contact webexpeditions.net

Eric and the team were flown in to Hercules Inlet Antarctica, the official expedition start point! Check out the link to his podcast to hear more about their adventures.

One of the goals of this expedition is, of course, to "travel to the "front lines" of global warming to document the changes occurring in these last great frozen places". It might seem like a stretch to jump to the article we've seeded here.....beaches in Costa Rica, but the reality is that the affects of global climate change can be seen across the world.

The weather seems to be moving toward a small window which means that we most likely will have an opportunity to fly to the ice tomorrow. No matter when it comes, it always seems like there is never enough time. Something else that always needs to be done.

Today was considerably more relaxing than yesterday. With all of my gear packed there was mostly managerial tasks today. We had a meeting with ALE's Peter McDowell who gave us the low down on the many protocols involving with flying to, landing on and traveling across Antarctica. Unlike the Arctic, the Antarctic is governed by a multinational treaty that restricts the types of things that can enter the continent, the need to have Antarctica remain as it was found (it is illegal to remove rocks, etc) and the strict guidelines that will help preserve the pristine nature of the continent into the future (hopefully).

Dong, Bill and I met a few times today to discuss our own arrival and the things we needed to do in the upcoming hours. By five o'clock, all our bags were picked up and there was nothing else to do but sit around and wait for the 'all clear' call. Of course, I'm making it sound easier than it really is and there is a substantial list of last minute tasks that I'm trying desperately to tick off.

One the few expedition traditions I have is to shave my head prior to a big trip. I think the first time I did it was in 2001 when I went up to Ellesmere Island to assist the NOMADS Online Classroom's Arctic Blast expedition. People have asked me if my head gets cold but with my Terramar balaclava and neck gaiter and then a light hat further covered by my Sierra Designs parka (with hood up), I am usually more hot than anything. Besides, it's simply nice not to have to deal with a greasy mop - you know, because of the whole two months without a shower thing.

Late last week, the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee passed a global warming bill. While we love to see action on global warming, this bill needs some big changes for our beloved plant to stand a chance of avoiding climate catastrophe. There are three fundamental problems with the bill that we need to address as the bill moves through the Senate. First, the bill would set an emissions reduction target far below what scientists agree is necessary to stop global warming and ocean acidification. Emission scenarios developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change indicate that the United States must reduce emissions 45 percent or more below 1990 levels by 2020 in order to stabilize the atmosphere at a safe level of 350 parts per million or below. The Senate bill is projected to reduce emissions just 4% below 1990 levels by 2020 - far too little, too late. Second, the bill would rollback one of our nation's most successful environmental laws: the Clean Air Act. The Clean Air Act is our only existing environmental law that could allow us to reach a goal of 350 ppm, but the bill as it currently stands would remove the Act's authority to do so. The bill would bar the Environmental Protection Agency from setting an overall cap - such as 350 ppm -- on the permissible amount of carbon pollution. Just when we need every tool in the toolbox to fight global warming, the Senate bill would take away one of our most important tools. Third, the bill's offset provisions are so vast and poor that they undermine its modest emission-reduction goals. Economists have determined that many industries will invest in dubious offsets instead of reducing their carbon emissions.

The political climate in Washington, D.C., is failing the very real, physical climate of places like the poles, which have already changed for the worse. Our elected leaders need to fix the problem, not apply false
band-aids. Please join the Center for Biological Diversity and sign our petition
to President Obama and the Senate for strong global warming legislation that
1) sets an overall cap on atmospheric carbon dioxide levels of no more than 350 parts per million; 2) maintains the Clean Air Act's ability to curb carbon pollution, and 3) eliminates or greatly reduces offsets and other loopholes.

Remember, it's cool to be cold. Save the Poles. Save the planet.

For more information, please visit www.savethepoles.com

For information about guided Antarctic expeditions, please visit

http://www.antarctic-logistics.com/

For media inquiries, please contact lora@screamagency.com

For technical inquires, please contact webexpeditions.net

Team members Eric, Dong, and Bill are all in Punta Arenas and finishing up last minute grocery shopping, last fresh meals, and last couple nights in a real bed before they hit the ice. Read more of the story @

Remember, it's cool to be cold. Save the Poles. Save the planet.

Crisis central in Colorado this morning. With my departure date looming ominously close, today decided (for whatever reason) to reign chaos on me and everything I touched.

Beware of snow and ice? Yeah right. I can't wait to get to Antarctica where life is simple and all I'll have to worry about is thawing out my Clif bars enough to be able to chew them.

Right now I am up to my neck in craziness - replacing an HD video camera that mysteriously blew up while charging, setting up remote web posting capabilities - a process so vast and expansive that my brain actually hurts. In fact, there is now smoke coming out of my ears. Chargers, systems, back ups these details are critical.

On a positive note, my gear is all packed - 4 bags total (I'll get food in punta arenas). I also finished a heat exchanger that should reduce fuel consumption dramatically, put together a comprehensive repair kit and a bunch of other odds and ends.

More tomorrow, now back to the fray.