Share
THIS MONTH IN EDA                         sustaineda.org                                
Ratification results
What did EDA’s Research Team just discover?
Volunteers: EDA’s greatest asset
New bills added to State Legislative tracker
Earth Day and EDA
Registration for EDA's free education seminars is now open
Colorado River Compact - 1922 Impasse
Hydrogen as a clean energy source - Part 2
Stop wasting food – Part 2
Worth Noting
_______________________________________________________________
Back issues of EDA News can be found on the EDA website.

RATIFICATION RESULTS
Read time: 1:22

From April 3 9, EDA held a vote to ratify the appointment of Carl E. Patten as Managing Director, and James B. Quilligan as Director of Development. Both roles were ratified by our Active Members and were delighted to announce that we had 77% participation in this democratic process.

Our sincere thanks each and every member who chose to participate in this ratification with a remarkably high turnout. Why is that important?

Democracy is our middle name
Most non-profit organizations are typically created by a few people with a burning issue or cause that they want to advocate. It’s a fairly easy process in the United States to get a social organization started. All it takes are three people, a President, Secretary and Treasurer, to apply for non-profit status.  Because these leaders are usually self-appointed, they are often interested more in attracting a lot of followers than in giving them voting rights as members.

Economic Democracy Advocates is different. We did not want that type of structure. Since ‘Democracy’ is our middle name, we wanted everyone to have maximum power and participation in the organization. This is why we created a Cooperative Charter to supplement our By-Laws.

Everyone has a voice
The Charter was written and edited by our members, voted on, ratified and signed as a codified legal document alongside our charitable 501(c)3 and educational 501(c)4 By-laws in 2018. Our By-laws are the letter of the law, and the Charter is the spirit of the law. 

Bergman and Allderdice, the attorneys who helped us develop our twin non-profits in the State of California, agreed that the addition of the Cooperative Charter to our By-laws would create a much stronger and resilient organization. As a matter of fact, other non-profits have since modeled their organization after our Charter.

At a time when democracy is being attacked through populism, authoritarianism, the erosion of civil liberties and economic inequality, were proud of EDAs resolve to create a truly democratic organization. EDA is a place where everyone has a voice. A high voter turnout means something vitally important: you are heard!

What did EDA’s Research Team just discover?
Read time: 1:15
In August 2022, the Research Team began work on phase one of a report for Protect Our Aquifer (POA) in Memphis, Tennessee. This was submitted in November 2022, and in January our team began phase two which was completed last month. The purpose of this study id to determine the degree to which the groundwater available to Shelby County, TN, is sustainable.

By examining the area’s aquifer through the lens of carrying capacity, the team appears to have discovered some unreported information about the amount of water in the aquifer.

The media in Memphis claims that there is 57 trillion gallons of groundwater underlying Shelby County, inferring publicly that it is all accessible by pumping it out of the ground. But EDA determined that only 12 trillion gallons of this groundwater is actually accessible for the people of the area.

This is significant because it means that there is nearly four-fifths less groundwater available from the aquifer than previously thought. If these results are verified and discussed, they could become the basis for new policies such as greater conservation, collaborative groundwater management and equitable apportionment of groundwater in Shelby County.  

Recognizing our dedicated volunteers
Altogether, the research team spent hundreds of hours working on this complex project. It stimulated a lot of creative thinking because the team was working in both a traditional scientific area and the new field of carrying capacity.

Since each team member worked on a different aspect of the report, they all had a stake in the outcome. There’s a high degree of satisfaction in seeing the final document and saying, "I worked on that part!"
EDA would like to thank every member of the Research Team for all their help. Their work on this cooperative project is a prime example of what can be accomplished when people work together towards a common goal.
 
Volunteers: EDA's greatest asset
Read time: 1:03

"Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much."
Helen Keller


Your expertise, skills and contributions are a huge asset to EDA and once again, we’re looking for volunteers for a number of teams in EDA. Time commitment for each team varies from one hour a month to as much time as you can manage. Volunteering in EDA not only helps further our goal of economic democracy – it also creates a wonderful opportunity for you to learn more. And you experience a sense of personal accomplishment the results of your collaborative efforts.

Here’s where you could help us now:

Communications:  We need a number of people to be part of an editorial team for the EDA Newsletter. Time commitment:  one hour per month. And if you have some writing experience, we’d love to have you help out on othe communications team.

Education:  Do you have a background in education or training? If so, you’ll enjoy sitting on this team. Our Education Chair is also leaving and we’re looking for someone to fill that role. Education has some very exciting projects coming up. Time commitment:  approximately four – six hours per month.

Advocacy: Our Advocacy team will be working closely with the education team on community outreach and training, in addition to its work with partnering organizations. Time commitment: approximately four to six hours per month.

Research: This team just completed a report on water sustainability in Memphis, Tennessee, and we’re poised to do a similar study in the Southwest. The research team meets every week for about an hour and a half.

Don’t know where you’d like to volunteer, or what’s involved in any of these teams, let’s talk!

New bills added to the State Legislative tracker
Find out what's happening in your state
Read time: 1:30
Since January our State Legislation team has been reviewing legislation from all US states in session this year. As of April 30th, 18 states have ended their sessions, and on April 10th, Louisiana started their session.

The selection team has reviewed a large number of bills and selected those that address EDA’s focus on the sustainability and equitability of food, water and energy.
Here's what we've added to the maps on the State Legislative tracker:
    • Blue (Water) - 29 bills
    • Green (Food) - 43 bills
    • Gold (Energy) - 20 bills
Legislation activities for water
We have included the Colorado River Compact states and Texas. The Federal government continues to express confidence that the seven states involved in the Colorado River Compact can reach consensus without litigation, to share the cutbacks necessary for the future health of the Colorado River.

Currently in Texas, groundwater use is covered by the law of absolute ownership. This means the groundwater belongs to the owners of the land above it and may be used or sold as private property. This is sometimes called 'the law of the biggest pump'. Texas appears to be starting to explore and plan for a future that will require more involvement in water management by the State.

Legislation activities for energy
Model state legislation bills for energy have been focused on renewable energy credits on state taxes.

Legislation activities for food
State legislation for food looks to maximize the use of federal money in funding supplemental nutritional assistance programs (SNAP).

If you find bills that support the equitability and sustainability of resources in your region, please contact us. We’d like to hear if you or your community are interested in learning more about advocating for a bill, and if there’s an opportunity for EDA to help.

Your opportunity to learn more
It's encouraging to see how many states are focusing more and more on resource democracy. There are still a lot of bills to review, and we won’t be able to capture everything that deals with resource management and/or use in a timely manner for all 50 states. If you would enjoy doing some detective work to find additional bills, please join us.  The more people we have, the less work and time it takes to complete the entire process.

To join the state legislation exploration process, contact: grant.grover@sustaineda.org.
Earth Day and EDA
Read time:  0:49

On April 22, EDA held Earth Day events in North Carolina, Colorado and Ohio. Two events featured a table display and banner, EDA infographics on food, water and energy and other promotional material. Some of our members were on hand to talk with people about EDA and provide information about our mission and values and the type of projects we're working on. The teams collected contact information from attendees, and the At-Large Trustees will be following up with those people. We were delighted to welcome one new member from Ohio who attended our end of month Open Board meeting.
The three teams who organized the events were very pleased with the results and agreed that they would be interested in doing other similar events in the future.

This is a great way to introduce EDA at community events in your area. We can inform and educate citizens on how to advocate for a more sustainable and equitable use of our resources.  These events help increase our membership and encourage more volunteers to join this grass roots movement.
If anyone is interested in joining or starting an event outreach team, please contact the At-Large Trustees, James Kolb, Terry Blatt or Geoff Schaber at any time.  A table-top event kit and training will be provided.

Registration for EDA's free education seminars is now open
Read time:  1:10
Economic democracy is about creating a more equal and just economy, where everyone has a say in how resources are used and distributed. This ensures that people's needs are met and that resources are used in a way that benefits everyone, not just a small group of people.

This first series of eight seminars will discuss the basic steps toward the development of economic democracy at local and regional levels. Join us for these free weekly education sessions from May 17 – July 5. Once you register, we will email you a confirmation along with your link to the sessions.

Principles of Local Economic Democracy
Every Wednesday at 7pm ET / 4pm PT

May 17
Freedom to use resources: guaranteeing the right of all people to produce and utilize their common resources.


May 24
Equal access to resources: ensuring that the commons are available for
everyone who needs them.


May 31
Decentralized production and distribution: cooperating in the creation and allocation of resources for the people of the region where they are produced.


June 7
Harmonious design of regional communities: helping
citizens adapt to social and environmental changes in their development and use of common resources.


June 14
Managing complexity: providing education and technology for the management of common resources to build communities and advance regional society.


June 21
The story of self-sufficiency: organizing citizens to participate in decision-making for the generation, distribution and protection of their regional commons.


June 28
Sustainable use of resources: governing renewable and non-renewable resources to ensure they are plentiful and equitable for
people in the future.


July 5
What kind of world are we inhabiting next:
transforming our regional systems of economics and governance for the benefit of everyone.


The Colorado River Compact - 1922 Impasse
Read time: 2:43
At the first meeting of the Colorado River Compact Commission, January 1922, Chairman Herbert Hoover said he wished to hear what each Commissioner had to say. He asked Delph Carpenter of Colorado to lead the discussion. Carpenter laid out what would prove to be the main points of agreement and contention.
A March 31, 1922 photo of the Colorado River Commission. Standing left to right: Delph E. Carpenter (Colorado), James G. Scrugham (Nevada), R. E. Caldwell (Utah), Frank C. Emerson (Wyoming), Stephen B. Davis, Jr. (New Mexico), W. F. McClure (California) and W. S. Norviel (Arizona). Seated: Gov. Emmet D. Boyle (Nevada), Gov. Oliver H. Shoup (Colorado), Herbert Hoover (federal representative and chair) and Gov. Merritt C. Mecham (New Mexico). The governors were not members of the Commission. Photo: Colorado State University Library
Like the other six Commissioners, Carpenter felt duty-bound to achieve a favorable outcome for his state. He was a lawyer by profession, more familiar than he cared to be with the tribulations involved in settling water issues in a courtroom, so he determined that negotiations be favorable for the seven states involved. As he saw it, the objectives of the Commission were:
  • To avoid future litigation by settling in advance issues that could be brought to court

  • Recognition by all Commissioners that interstate cooperation meant giving up some of their states’ sovereignty

  • To base decision-making on reliable facts – how much water flowed in the river, what present and future needs were, accurate data regarding locations and the types of dams and reservoirs that would be built

  • To reach agreements that honored the needs of upper basin states (Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico) and lower basin states (Nevada, Arizona, California)
After representatives of the other states had spoken, two primary concerns were apparent. Arizona and California reminded their colleagues that the levees on the river could break at any time and cause massive flooding. Wyoming’s representative, who had also been through litigation over water, said everything needed to be done to prevent that. And he agreed with Carpenter that upper basin states should be reassured that water would be available for their states to grow and develop.
Also present at the meeting was the Director of the US Reclamation Service, Arthur Davis. He acknowledged there were diverse opinions around federally constructed projects; disputes would need to be settled before a compact process could proceed. He said agreement on critical data was needed and he assured the Commissioners that evidence indicated enough water was available for the needs of all seven states and Mexico.

He went on to say that no state would get priority over any other state as a result of construction. He urged that existing claims of priority be dropped. Davis did not bring up two facts about the Reclamation Service, one being that repaying the cost of 24 government-built reclamation projects in the West had come in under 10%. Fact number two, only 7% of the West’s irrigated land was due to those reclamation projects.

Nevertheless, the Commissioners proceeded to look at parsing out the water based on each states’ irrigation needs. It did not work. Estimates for new acreage to be irrigated were inflated with the result that the figures for potential irrigation surpassed the figures for available water. Hoover, primarily interested in getting a dam built to prevent flooding in the lower basin states, was upset with the Commissioners lack of regard for the bigger picture. He could not grasp that the principal problem was conflicting needs and fears between upper basin and lower basin states.

Carpenter had lived most of his life with the principal problem and formulated another way to look at the situation. He proposed what he saw as an equitable exchange. The upper basin states from which 60-70 percent of the water flowed would be assured that their use of water would be unlimited in exchange for dam and reservoir development in the lower basin states.

Hoover called for a vote. It was 4 in favor (upper basin) to 3 against (lower basin). Hoover was discouraged. All that had been done, he said, was to define differences. He wondered if another session was worthwhile. Some thought failure was imminent, others believed understanding differences was necessary, and all believed the data they had been given was too limited; they wanted better facts and time to consult with people at home. Another vote was taken. The decision was unanimous to adjourn and meet again in March somewhere in the Southwest.


In the summer newsletter, we’ll look at how the Colorado River Compact Commission got past this impasse.


Hydrogen as a clean energy source - Part 2
Read time: 1:02

Last month, we looked at how hydrogen use as a clean fuel source has been getting lots of media coverage, but that it’s not well understood. We explained different "colors" (grey/blue/green/pink/yellow) that we label hydrogen fuel by, which vary depending on processes used to create the hydrogen fuel itself.

Any process that uses natural gas, such as grey and blue hydrogen, has the additional emissions footprint that results from fracking, through which almost all natural gas is obtained.  In 2014, the US EPA estimated that almost a third of US methane emissions (man-made and natural combined) came from leaking oil and gas production wells.  Methane is 86 times as potent a greenhouse gas (GHG) as carbon dioxide, over a 20-year time-frame from when it is released. Considering blue hydrogen to be a clean fuel is controversial at best, and then only if carbon capture becomes viable.

Green hydrogen’s viability will depend on how much of our renewable energy infrastructure will be allotted to processing it.  There is not enough renewable energy yet to consider green hydrogen a viable option of any scale.

For hydrogen to be considered a clean fuel, it must be prevented from leaking into the atmosphere prior to being burned.  When leaked, hydrogen itself acts indirectly as a greenhouse gas, because it negatively reacts with the ability of methane and ozone to deplete from the atmosphere.  According to a 2006 article published by the Massachusetts Institute of technology (M.I.T.), hydrogen directly released has a greenhouse gas potential 5.8 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 100-year time frame.

Stop wasting food - Part 2
Read time: 1:43

In the US each year, 160 billion pounds of food goes uneaten or unsold. That’s about 38% of our entire food supply, the equivalent of 149 billion meals annually. All that unused food is valued at $444 billion, or roughly 2% of US GDP. This has the same climate footprint as the entire U.S. passenger, commercial, and military aviation industries combined (4% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions).


Beyond emissions, producing food that goes unsold or uneaten uses up 22% of U.S. freshwater and 16% of cropland. Wasted food is also a drain on the economy, since food that goes uneaten still costs money to grow, harvest, transport, cool, prepare, and then ultimately dispose of.


This waste happens all along the food system supply chain, from farm to fridge, and up to 50% of this waste happens in households. While it is fairly simple for average citizens to reduce their food waste at home (by shopping wisely, being aware of use-by dates, and so on), the commercial food system is a separate issue that consumers can’t directly influence.


However, there are non-profits and non-governmental organizations working on this side of the waste issue. The Environmental Defense Fund has partnered with national non-profit ReFED to create the Food Waste Fellowship, which places graduate-level interns at food manufacturers to collect data and recommend waste-reduction practices at the factory level. In order to improve processes and reduce waste, recommendations might include upcycling peels and trimmings into other food products, or analyzing where food is wasted during cooking and assembly.

ReFed has created an online Insights Engine that provides extensive data on the problem and proposed solutions for each type of stakeholder, including consumers, government, manufacturers, producers and food service. ReFED has modeled 42 food waste solutions to determine which were most effective for the different sectors of the supply chain. It’s estimated that implementing these solutions would cost $18 billion per year but generate $74 billion in total economic benefits.

Each year, these new measures would result in greenhouse gas emissions reductions of 109M metric tons of CO2, and water savings of 6T gallons, and it would save the equivalent of 4.3 billion meals for people in need. Over ten years, it would also result in 60,000 new jobs. Ambitious implementation of these modeled solutions could reduce the amount of surplus food by 21 million tons or 23%, ReFED estimates.

These solutions are urgently needed, not just to reduce greenhouse gases, but to help ensure that as many people as possible are able to access nutritious, affordable food. There is simply no reason to continue such wastefulness.

Thirst Gap is all about how the Southwest is adapting to water shortages as climate change causes the region to warm up and dry out. The series zooms in on people and places grappling with limited water supplies in the Colorado River watershed, and examines the trade-offs that come with learning to live with less water.

Covid-19 exposed the catastrophic impact on privatizing vital services

The Covid-19 pandemic has exposed the catastrophic fallout of decades of global privatization and market competition. This has often resulted in inefficiency, corruption, dwindling quality, increasing costs and subsequent household debt, further marginalizing poorer people and undermining the social value of basic needs like housing and water. We need a radical change in direction.
The bad math of the fossil fuel industry

We currently have enough fossil fuels to progressively transition off of them, says climate campaigner Tzeporah Berman, but the industry continues to expand oil, gas and coal production and exploration. With searing passion and unflinching nerve, Berman reveals the delusions keeping true progress from being made -- and offers a realistic path forward: the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty. Learn more about the global initiative for transparency and accountability in phasing out fossil fuels forever, supported by the Dalai Lama, Nobel Prize laureates and many more.

Join one of our groups
You're welcome to visit any team and sit in on their meetings. It's a great way to learn what they're working on and see which team you might prefer to participate in. Email one of the contacts to receive a link to the meeting.

Facebook
 
Twitter
 
Youtube
 
Instagram
 
Website
 
Email
Sent to: _t.e.s.t_@example.com
Economic Democracy Advocates, 638 Spartanburg Hwy, Ste. 70-342, Hendersonville, NC 28792, United States
Don't want future emails?
Unsubscribe


Email Marketing by ActiveCampaign