The San Francisco-based non-profit Action For Nature has sent forth the call for youth ages 8 to 16 whose passion for nature has motivated a personal and significant environmental effort.  

Young people meeting these criteria are encouraged to apply for the 2010 Young Eco-Hero Awards, an honor resulting in a prize of up to $500, an award certificate and potential opportunities to share research and education with others.

Former applicants to the program have come from diverse backgrounds in environmental advocacy, but an early interest in the natural world is what Beryl Kay, president of Action For Nature, believes often sets apart potential environmental experts and educators.

“The years 8 to 16 are a window between early childhood development and college or working commitments,” Kay says. “These young people are our hope for the future protection of our natural world. We want to recognize and encourage them. We want to celebrate their successes. We want them to become role models for other youth.”

For more information about applying for this opportunity, visit Action For Nature. 

MOTHER EARTH NEWS has enjoyed a strong, engaged and active community of readers and contributors since 1970. Whereas in the '70s that meant letters and workshops, today there are even more ways to stay in touch, inspire and help each other. In addition to reading Archive articles at MotherEarthNews.com, leaving comments, writing to MOTHER and participating in the online forums, you can also find MOTHER EARTH NEWS on social media sites:

Become a fan on Facebook at Facebook.com/MotherEarthNewsMag. We post links to MOTHER EARTH NEWS articles and blogs that we think you'll find especially interesting or useful, as well as other updates, such as the launching of MOTHER EARTH NEWS Radio. If you're a Facebook member, you can become a fan of the page, rate a post a thumbs up or down, see what other readers have to say and post your own thoughts. You can also easily share items you like with your friends. Even if you don't have a Facebook account yourself, you can visit the page and see what we've posted and view other readers' comments.

Follow MOTHER EARTH NEWS on Twitter at Twitter.com/MotherEarthNews. You'll find links to new MOTHER EARTH NEWS content, ideas and suggestions, plus links to other great online content and event notices that we find. If you have a Twitter account, you can reply to questions we ask, comment on articles posted, or offer suggestions. Plus, it's a fast and easy way to let your friends know what you're reading and share the articles and ideas you like best.

Post your photos and view other readers' images at CU.MotherEarthNews.com, our photo-sharing site. Keep an eye on the homepage, as we run photo contests from time to time. Even without a formal event, we regularly search the CU site for great photo submissions and publish our favorites in the CU department of every issue of MOTHER EARTH NEWS magazine. You could see your photos in print!

You can also find us on YouTube at YouTube.com/MotherEarthNewsMag. Check out our video channel and find a mix of videos we've put together and great videos we've discovered online. Have a video you'd like to share (one you found or made)? You can send us a message from our channel page to let us know, and your video might be added to the MOTHER EARTH NEWS video channel.

As you can see, there's no shortage of ways to receive MOTHER EARTH NEWS information and tips, to communicate with the staff, and to get in touch with your fellow MOTHER EARTH NEWS readers — a tremendous resource for advice, suggestions and support. 

We receive hundreds of letters from readers at various stages of living more fulfilling, self-reliant lives, from greenhorns to seasoned veterans. Make the most of this ready-made community, full of folks like you who are trying ideas, posing good questions and figuring out how to make their dreams reality. Ask questions; share your stories. A healthy, vibrant community is one of the most important elements of living wisely, so whether you choose to connect online or off — or both — dive in. Contact us, get to know each other — however you do it, let the fun begin! 

Maintained since 1947 by the Board of Directors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists at the University of Chicago, the symbolic "Doomsday Clock" represents the analogy that the human race is at a time that is a "few minutes to midnight," where midnight represents destruction by nuclear war. In recent years, the analogy of midnight has also included catastrophic destruction as a result of climate change. The minute hand on the clock has been moved, backward and forward, only 19 times since the clock's creation. On Jan. 14, the Bulletin, which includes more than a dozen Nobel Laureates, moved the minute hand back one minute, from five to six minutes before midnight.

In their statement regarding the move, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists said that "By shifting the hand back from midnight by only one additional minute, we emphasize how much needs to be accomplished, while at the same time recognizing signs of collaboration among the United States, Russia, the European Union, India, China, Brazil, and others on nuclear security and on climate stabilization."

Changing the time on the Doomsday Clock always garners media coverage, but perhaps more so following December's Copenhagen climate talks, which have generally been declared disappointing, at the least. Despite the offical results of Copenhagen, if media coverage is any indication, environmental awareness and responsibility are on the rise. Grist reports, for example, the hopeful news that Developing Nations Continue to Lead Post-Copenhagen.

The decision to move the hand back a minute is a hopeful one, and it indicates that there is much work to be done. Do you think, in the analogy of the clock, that the Bulletin's decision is accurate? Do you agree, or do you think we're in better or worse shape than the one-minute move indicates? Post your comments below.

You can read more about the Doomsday Clock and this year's time change in these articles:

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, official statement, plus a video of the Bulletin's Clock Announcement
'Doomsday Clock' Moves Away from Midnight, but Only by 1 Minute, from ABC News
Scientists Cautiously Optimistic as Doomsday Clock Reset, from Grist 

Cute just got a whole lot more profound.

Enter The Lucha Narrative, a new clothing/accessory company with a mission. A clothing line may seem trite to the unobservant, but this stylish business packs a punch. The name Lucha is Spanish for “fight,” and the fight is for justice. To back up this lofty mission are five characters with pow: Lucci, Clark, Milo, Jet and Pancho. Each quirky critter has big plans for its own charitable operation:

	Lucci supports literacy programs and improved education systems
	Clark supports music and arts education
	Milo provides relief around the world
	Jet provides local hunger relief and fights to end world hunger
	Pancho raises funds for children’s hospitals

Here’s how it works: You buy a t-shirt, hoodie or tote bag with a certain character on it and a portion of the proceeds go to that character’s cause. By shopping, you become a social activist.

Sarah Sung, graphic designer and creative genius behind the operation, says she has high hopes for The Lucha Narrative. “I would love to see Lucha grow to the extent of accomplishing different mission work around the world, to lend a hand and connect with communities and neighbors, and to raise money for different organizations,” Sung says.

And she’s well on her way. “Lucha is also working on putting together different events to promote social activism and help raise funds for different charities,” Sung says. Just more than a year since it’s launch, The Lucha Narrative has already shouldered fundraisers for Blood:Water Mission, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and Rescue Mission. Sung is also in the early stages of planning an event focusing on world hunger, which she aspires to set in motion this year.

The Lucha Narrative binds noble goals with thoughtful fashion, but Sung also tries to make her business as earth-conscious as she can currently afford. By using products from eco-friendly clothing suppliers, such as American Apparel and Alternative Apparel, Sung encourages the use of recycled materials and low-impact dyes. Both companies also offer organic cotton products and are committed to sweat-shop free practices.

Though Sung claims to be taking “baby steps” in growing The Lucha Narrative, her goals are set and her mission is clear: “Do Justice. Love Mercy.”   

To find out more about The Lucha Narrative’s events and to purchase items that give back, visit The Lucha Narrative website. You can also find Lucha on Facebook and MySpace.

At a ceremony today in Berlin, the United Nations will declare 2010 as the International Year of Biodiversity in an effort to raise awareness of the importance of biodiversity ­— the variety of life around the world — and how human activity is threatening it.

The campaign will be marked by a series of events that will aim to influence the thinking of the world’s decision makers in hopes that they will change their practices and policies to become more environmentally friendly. The first of these events will take place on January 21 and 22 in Paris, where the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) will meet, bringing together many world leaders. The Convention on Biological Diversity, which is part of the United Nations Environment Programme, is heading the campaign.

Many species are facing extinction due to changing climates. In December, the International Union for Conservation of Nature released Species and Climate Change, a report that highlighted the way climate change is destroying the habitat of plants and animals around the world. Campaign leaders stress that a breakdown in any part of the world’s natural food system, such as the extinction of a species, can have severe consequences on the entire living network.

For more information on the campaign, see the Convention on Biological Diversity’s 2010 International Year of Biodiversity page.

Hydraulic fracturing, also known as hydrofracturing or hydrofracking, is a process used to increase the water flow from a bedrock well. This process occurs when the size of the fractures in bedrock is increased so that more water can enter into the well. Some drilling companies argue that hydrofracking costs less than, and is a better alternative to, drilling deeper.  However, according to the January 4, 2010 newsletter issue for the Center for Health, Environment & Justice titled “Growing Opposition to High Risk Hydrofracking Technology”; many scientists are opposed to the process because of the high levels of radium it releases into the environment. The newsletter also states that “water brought thousands of feet to the surface from drilling had levels of radioactive radium – 226 as high as 267 times the limit safe for discharge into the environment.” An article dating back to July 2008 from the timesunion.com called Hydrofracking: Toxic gas-drilling technique explains that hydrofracking is also a dangerous process when used on the Marcellus Shale, a layer of rock that geologists predict will provide natural gas to the United States for more than 2 years. “The gas in the Marcellus is held like bubbles in a brick of Swiss cheese. To extract it, a mixture of water, sand and chemicals is shot into the earth with such force it fractures the rock, releasing the bubbles to the surface. When the gas surfaces, so does the water — laden with natural toxins from the shale, including suspected cancer-causing compounds.”

You can find out more about hydrofracking and its affects in Does Natural-Gas Drilling Endanger Water Supplies? and Industry campaign targets “hydraulic fracturing” bill.

Have you ever heard of hydrofracking? Do you think it’s worth the risk?

Remember the so-called “Climategate” e-mails that created a lot of hype last month? Now that the noise has subsided, we are left to ask, What did all that really amount to? 

First, What Started It All?

In November, unknown hackers stole thousands of documents and e-mails, some as many as 13 years old, from computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in Norwich, England. The Climate Research Unit is a pretty big player in global warming research. The British Broadcasting Corp. notes that they are one of the world’s leading research bodies on natural- and human-induced climate change.

The hacked e-mails, including personal exchanges from those at the CRU, appeared on the Internet on Tuesday, Nov. 17 (without permission from the university). A spokesperson from the university has confirmed that their server was hacked and that they are completing a thorough internal investigation and have involved the police.

Why Did the E-mails Create Such a Stir?

Apparent deception in some of the e-mails led to extensive media coverage and fired up skeptics of global warming, with some claiming these e-mails reveal that scientists have been purposefully skewing climate change research. For instance, one e-mail written by a researcher discusses using the “trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years” in an attempt to “hide the decline.” (Watch this CNN video, Climate E-mails Hacked, for more details.)

In another e-mail, a scientist calls one research paper “garbage,” saying, “I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

Other e-mails, such as the one detailed in the Time article, Has ‘Climategate’ Been Overblown? use some harsh language to talk about global warming skeptics. The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a nonprofit devoted to promoting scientific solutions to environmental issues, explains that the most troubling messages refer to deleting e-mails to avoid disclosure in the event of a Freedom of Information request.  

The wording used in the e-mails in question provides little context, so it’s difficult to determine exactly what was done by the Climate Research Unit and why (especially for a casual reader). Seeing words such as “trick” and “hide” when referring to scientific evidence on such a serious global concern has certainly been enough to raise eyebrows for some, especially those already skeptical of climate change.

However, the Union of Concerned Scientists explains that the “trick” referred to is actually a common technique (i.e. a “trick of the trade”) of replacing one set of data with a more accurate set. (Read more on this phrasing plus an explanation of what “hide the decline” refers to in the UCS backgrounder Debunking Misinformation About Stolen Climate Emails in the “Climategate” Manufactured Controversy.)

How Have the Skeptics and the Scientific Community Reacted?

The Union of Concerned Scientists argues that “opposition groups are taking passages out of context to try to undermine public confidence in climate science.” Even some politicians, such as longtime climate change skeptic Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), consider the e-mails evidence against global warming. He has stated that “the e-mails reveal possible deceitful manipulation of important data and research” and that the controversy “could have far-reaching policy implications.”

On the other side of the debate, Brenda Ekwurzel, a climate scientist in the Union of Concerned Scientists’ Climate and Energy Program, is upset that certain members of Congress are using this isolated incident to undermine decades of climate research. “Opponents of climate change legislation are trying to deceive the American public on climate science,” she says. “After years attacking the science on its merits and failing, they’re now using stolen e-mails to attack climate scientists directly.”

Ekwurzel goes on to say that “our understanding of climate science is based on decades of research from thousands of scientists. These e-mails don’t affect what we know about human activity driving dangerous levels of global warming or the measures we must take to address it.”

James McCarthy, a former lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, recently sent a letter to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) stressing that e-mails stolen from climate scientists have no bearing on our overall understanding of climate science. He wrote: “The robust exchange of ideas in the peer-reviewed literature regarding climate science is evidence of the high degree of integrity in this process. The body of evidence that human activity is a prominent agent in global warming is overwhelming. The content of these few personal e-mails has no impact whatsoever on our overall understanding that human activity is driving dangerous levels of global warming.”

What’s the Actual Significance of the E-mails?

Let’s assume for a moment that certain researchers did indeed massage information to make certain pieces of evidence more convincing. What would this mean in the larger picture of climate change research? Jeff Masters, director and founder of the weather forecasting website Weather Underground and Ph.D. in pollution meteorology, argues that “even if every bit of mud slung at these scientists were true, the body of scientific work supporting the theory of human-caused climate change — which spans hundreds of thousands of scientific papers written by tens of thousands of scientists in dozens of different scientific disciplines — is too vast to be budged by the flaws in the works of the three or four scientists being subject to the fiercest attacks.”

Also, the Union of Concerned Scientists states that while it is still not clear any wrongdoing (by the scientists) took place, scientists in general should do more to address concerns about openness.

Indeed, this seems to be an important lesson to come out of the events. Judith A. Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, agrees, noting that scientists are frequently bombarded with requests for information. She states that “the number of such requests would be drastically diminished if all relevant and available data and metadata were made publicly accessible.”

The United Nations Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen ran from December 7 to 18, so the timing of the Climategate scandal was frustrating to many hopeful that the Copenhagen Summit would result in a positive global initiative to address global warming. Graham Cluley, a computer security expert and senior technology consultant for Sophos, a leading security company, thinks it’s possible that the Climate Research Unit was a hacker target precisely because the summit in Copenhagen was on the horizon. Even if that wasn’t the case, it can’t be denied that the buzz from bloggers and media personalities — especially those happy to take the issue of “spin” and do a lot of spinning of their own — cast a shadow over the Copenhagen talks. For skeptics, this shadow was one of doubt (perhaps dramatized and constructed doubt), while for those studying the comprehensive body of research indicating human-induced global warming, it was one of frustration.

The general consensus is that Climategate is largely hype, but one aspect that can’t be ignored is that some people seem to be buying it. A recent CNN global warming poll indicates that the number of Americans that think global warming is a problem is in decline. While several factors are likely contributing to this shift, the e-mails can’t be helping. So even if you agree with the Union of Concerned Scientists that the whole fiasco was a “manufactured controversy,” the way these controversies and subsequent media frenzies have the potential to cause actual shifts in thinking is still a significant concern.

What’s your opinion on the climate e-mail controversy? Post a comment below to share your thoughts.

To learn more, check out these resources on climate change:

Climate One Stop
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
National Climate Data Center
Union of Concerned Scientists