Climate Progress

No, I don’t mean that the home of crab cakes and Orioles is suddenly adopting Hollywood-style divorces–although the state’s unusual flag (pictured here) certainly suggest the state likes to be different.

Rather, the state is embracing the same smart electric utility regulations that has enabled California to be a leader in energy efficiency for three decades. As the Washington Post reports today:

In a bid to cut energy use, Maryland yesterday became just the fourth state in the nation to approve a plan that removes the incentive for electric utilities to sell more power in order to make more money.

In a rate case ruling issued yesterday, the Maryland Public Service Commission endorsed an approach known as decoupling, which ensures that utilities do not lose revenue if customers use less electricity.

Kudos to Maryland. “Decoupling” may seem like an arcane subject, but he is in fact one of the single most important climate solutions available–one that can achieve significant emissions savings while lowering people’s energy bills. The story goes on to explain how decoupling works:

(more…)

We hosted a get-together of some 40 progressive bloggers focused on energy and climate issues at the Center for American Progress Friday. Since I was both a host and speaker, I’m probably biased in saying the event successfully stimulated dialogue and strategy development. You can read an independent view of the event here. This is definitely something we hope to do on a semi-regular basis.

“Sea levels may rise by 9 inches this century, scientists warn” reads the headline from the UK newspaper The Independent, reporting on a new Science magazine study (subs. req’d). You would probably surmise from this headline that the study predicted sea levels may rise by a mere 9 inches this century. But it didn’t.

The study predicted sea levels may rise by 9 inches the century just from the melting of inland glaciers and ice caps–not from either thermal expansion of the water or from dynamic destruction of either the Greenland or Antarctic ice sheets.

Actually, the story itself gets it mostly right — “This does not include the rise in sea levels caused by the thermal expansion of water, which could potentially double this figure.”

But the headline writer has insured that the vast majority of people who don’t read the story will think sea level rise this century is no big deal.

Interestingly, the authors of this study are quite confident the loss of inland ice will raise sea levels more this century than loss of ice from the great eye sheets — a very many, like Nasa’s James Hansen (who fears 17 feet of sea level rise or more by 2100), do not share.

So why did the recent U.N. report low-ball sea level rise this century?

(more…)

Colin Challen, a member of Parliament and chair of the All Party Parliamentary Climate Change Group, has a good editorial in the latest issue of Science (subs. req’d). He makes a key point that is often missed in the debate:

Not only must we reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, we need a timetable that reduces the risk of positive feedbacks and sink failures that could lead to runaway catastrophic climate change.

We are “playing climate change poker,” as Challen says, fighting not just to avoid the consensus prediction for climate change, but the plausible worst-case scenario, which is far worse. That’s why even a 60% cut in emissions by mid-century may not be enough, and many are pushing for an 80% cut.

The entire editorial is reprinted here: (more…)

A good online review of my book from Truth & Progress:

Hell and High Water: Global Warming–the Solution and the Politics, Joe Romm. This work might be called the work to read after seeing An Inconvenient Truth. AIT provides the hopeful future, a muted discussion of many of the risks and difficulties facing us/US in turning the tide on Global Warming. Romm hits us in the face, hard, with a terrifying future and doesn’t mince words about the challenges ahead. In many ways, Hell and High Water might be the Global Warming work of most interest to the politically engaged (Democratic and/or Republican). Romm lays a strong case as to how Global Warming could be the death sentence for the Republican Party as reality becomes ever blatantly at odds with Republican Party rhetoric (or, actually, that Republican denial is ever more apparently at odds with facts staring us all in the face). Romm also highlights how, in an ever more difficult world in the years to come, either the United States figures out how to lead in dealing with mitigating/muting Global Warming and its impacts or risks becoming a pariah nation, with dire implications for the Republic and its citizens. Romm has been working literally for decades to try to move the globe toward a more energy efficient, renewable energy path, with experience working with the Rocky Mountain Institute and directing Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy in the Department of Energy during the Clinton Administration. Romm can be found blogging at Climate Progress.

I’m not nonplussed, but I am shocked, shocked at the N. Y. Times report:

The Japanese operator of a nuclear power plant stricken by an earthquake earlier this week said Wednesday that damage was worse than previously reported and that a leak of water was 50 percent more radioactive than initially announced.

For the third time in three days, Tokyo Electric Power apologized for delays and errors in announcing the extent of damage at the plant in this northwestern coastal city, which was struck Monday by a magnitude 6.8 earthquake. The company also said that tremors had tipped over “several hundred” barrels of radioactive waste, not 100 as it reported Tuesday, and that the lids had opened on “a few dozen” of those barrels.

Why is it you never read “Wind Farm Damage Worse Than Reported”? The L. A. Times has more alarming news:

(more…)

This online climate calculator from UC Berkeley provides a much more comprehensive picture of your total greenhouse gas emissions than most online calculators.

They also provide links to six carbon offset sellers (though two of the links are currently bad) should you decide to go carbon neutral. I am not endorsing any of those, although I will say that the CEOs from two of the offset companies on the list, Native Energy and Terrapass, were at the Markey hearing and made a very good case for their companies.

I confess I often just don’t understand what Planet Gore is trying to say. Here is the opening of a new post titled “Shocked, Shocked“:

This morning, the Washington Post joins House Government Reform Committee Chairman Henry Waxman in being nonplussed over a Bush Administration task force having met with industry representatives when formulating policy.

“Waxman said he was not surprised to see the prevalence of energy industry groups on the list of meetings.”

But “nonplussed” means “surprised”–though it is often used incorrectly. Like Waxman, no one is surprised that Cheney is a tool of the energy industry — or is that vice versa?

The “shocked, shocked” reference to Casablanca is equally strange, since it is normally used when people say they are surprised at something that they themselves are well aware of (if not doing themselves). But again, “Waxman said he was not surprised.”

A number of people have told me they are nonplussed (but definitely not “shocked, shocked”) that I can stomach reading PG at all, but I view them as the best (unintentionally) humorous diversion in the climate blogosphere. Let’s call these errors PG Disinfotainment Watch #39 and #40.

The Center for American Progress Action Fund is launching Clean My Ride, a campaign featuring webisodes of actors and activists urging the adoption of legislation “increasing gas mileage requirements and mandating the availability of e85 for flexible-fuel cars that can use either gasoline or ethanol.”

If you liked the dramatic chipmunk, you’ll love the first webisode.