Climate Progress

E&E News (subs. req’d) has a good article on the prospects for climate legislation in an election year — note at the end that House Republicans are going to oppose any serious, mandatory action:

Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) sees this year’s wide-open presidential election campaign as presenting a significant hurdle that could stymie passage of a global warming bill during this session of Congress.

“It’s going to verge on impossible,” the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee said yesterday in an exclusive interview. “We haven’t calculated the number of days that exist here for the drafting of legislation, but it’s not very many. And so the writing of the legislation is going to be difficult. And the presidential election is going to be a tremendous distraction. As will be the elections of all the members.”

Dingell said he had his doubts about whether the Senate will be successful in adopting a bill this year from Connecticut independent Joe Lieberman and Virginia Republican John Warner. Senate Democratic leaders say they hope to bring the bill up before the summer, but Dingell was
skeptical.

“There’s a big difference between saying, ‘We want to try,’ and, ‘We’re going to,’” he said.

The Capitol Hill debate over mandatory limits on heat-trapping greenhouse gases has largely been focused on the Senate. There, Democrats need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster expected from Oklahoma Republican Jim Inhofe. An E&E Daily analysis published earlier this week found that Democrats are within sight of 60.

But Dingell predicted it won’t be so easy.

(more…)

The deal to deforest the rainforests on 60,000 hectares of Woodlark Island for massive plantation of oil palm trees appears to be dead:

Vitro Plant, developer of a proposed oil palm project on Woodlark Island in Milne Bay, is said to have withdrawn the project…. It is believed Vitro’s withdrawal is due to pressure from environmentalists and non-governmental organisations to conserve the natural habitat of Woodlark Island.

Still, I’m looking forward to seeing someone do an analysis of deforestation generated by palm-oil for the whole country, since this article claims:

Mr. Hickey [Minister for Agriculture and Livestock] said oil palm was the largest income earner in the agriculture sector in Papua New Guinea. He said the value of export in 2006 was K660 million compared to coffee and cocoa at K337 million and K204 million respectively. [Note: $1 U.S. = 2.8 Kina.] Mr Hickey said the value of export of round logs in 2006 was K490 million. He said the world market demand for oil palm was very high and would remain high and with the increase in both production and price, the value of export would increase in the medium to long term.

Sarkozy attacks EU carbon targets - Financial Times. “The fact that France opted decades ago to stake its future energy needs on carbon-free nuclear power - which today provides almost 80 per cent of French electricity needs - should be taken into account when setting overall targets, he suggests.”

Tiny Car, Tough Questions - The Washington Post. “There must be a way to reconcile mass car ownership with global warming, but, at the moment, we haven’t found it.”

The Other Nano - New York Times op-ed. “We know now that gas-driven automobiles do terrible damage to the environment, and the notion of loosing millions upon millions of new carbon emitters on our planet is not something to celebrate. So while we admire Mr. Tata’s business and engineering acumen in creating the Nano, we ardently wish that he would focus his talents elsewhere: creating transportation that is both affordable and doesn’t emit ever more greenhouse gases.”

Global Advances Challenge U.S. Dominance in Science - New York Times. “The United States’ position is especially delicate, the agency said, given its reliance on foreign-born workers to fill technical jobs…. Many Americans remain ignorant about much of science, the board said. Many are unable to answer correctly when asked whether Earth moves around the Sun (it does).” [Thanks, NYT, but we had already googled the answer….]

So VC Vinod Khosla is not happy with with my recent attack on his (willful) ignorance, “VC Khosla blows his credibility dissing plug-ins.” Grist has given the billionaire a platform to defend himself, but he just spouts even more nonsense in the bizarrely titled post, “Pragmatists v. environmentalists, part I”:

I have been accused of dissing hybrids. I was mostly discussing Prius-type parallel hybrids and all the support they get, when one can get the same carbon reduction by buying a cheaper, similar-sized and -featured car and buying $10 worth of carbon credits. I was objecting to greenwashing (powered by a large marketing machine) that suggests hybrids can solve our problems….

Corn ethanol, which has been heavily maligned in the mainstream media, reduces carbon emissions (on a per-mile-driven basis) by almost the same amount as today’s typical hybrid….

The Prius is the corn ethanol of hybrid cars….

Seriously! This is like one of those newspaper puzzles: Can you spot all the errors?

1. Anyone who thinks buying offsets and a Prius-sized non-hybrid is equal from a carbon perspective to buying a Prius has no clue about climate, offsets or carbon. Offsets are so transparently dubious, I made them a separate category on Climate Progress. Burning petroleum and releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere where much of it will last for centuries cannot be undone by, say, planting some trees or buying some cheap RECs, which are probably the most popular U.S. offsets.

2. The Prius is in fact a parallel-series hybrid, with lots of other intelligent design features absent from most other hybrids (see this Scientific American article), which makes it easily the most fuel-efficient no-compromise affordable hybrid ever built. Easily. And it will pay for itself in fuel savings at current gas prices (with the carbon savings for free), something you won’t be able to say about cellulosic ethanol for a long time.

3. Nobody “suggests hybrids can solve our problem” — Vinod, please provide even two links to support this absurd straw man. But they are a key part of the solution — as I will discuss in a subsequent post. Indeed, nobody I have ever met (other than maybe Vinod) suggests cellulosic ethanol can solve our problems without either hybrids or more likely plug ins (and I was a major advocate and funder of cellulosic ethanol long before Vinod jumped on the bandwagon, pushed the driver off, and tried to take over the reins — Vinod has the fanaticism typical of the newly converted).

4. “Corn ethanol, which has been heavily maligned in the mainstream media” — actually corn ethanol has been heavily maligned in the scientific and policy literature. Why? Its benefits are small if not nonexistent, whereas its drawbacks are large, as I explain at length in this article. Indeed, it now appears that corn ethanol is actually driving up tropical deforestation (!) and it may even increase total greenhouse gas emissions, as one recent scientific analysis argues. I think the most defensible statement one can make today is that, most corn ethanol probably provides no net climate benefit compared to gasoline. And if corn ethanol once had a role accelerating the transition to cellulosic ethanol, thanks to recent energy legislation it has simply become Frankenstein’s monster.

5. “Corn ethanol … reduces carbon emissions (on a per-mile-driven basis) by almost the same amount as today’s typical hybrid.” No. As I’ve said, most corn ethanol probably has no net carbon emissions reductions, if all of its impacts were fully accounted for. And don’t let Khosla’s clever wording — “today’s typical hybrid” — confuse the issue:. The Prius is not a typical hybrid. It is the best hybrid by far, and it cuts carbon emissions 50% compared to a comparably-sized non-hybrid (which corn ethanol does not come close to even under incomplete life-cycle analyses). Yes “today’s typical hybrid” probably only cuts emissions 25%, but that’s because a) it isn’t as well-designed as the Prius and b) a number of manufacturers used some or all of the efficiency gains to increase acceleration (you know who you are, Honda). That is hardly justification for dissing the Prius, as Khosla does (”it is no different than Gucci bags”). Quite the reverse. The Prius should be praised and the Accord V6 “muscle hybrid” condemned. But of course there’s no need to do that since the marketplace has spoken: The Prius is the best- and fastest-selling hybrid (by far) whereas Honda discontinued the Accord V6 because of poor sales. Hmm, I never realized that Gucci made the best- and fastest-selling bags in the world….

5. Corn ethanol is the Hummer of alternative fuels. ‘Nuff said.

6. “Pragmatists v. environmentalists.” As if. Khosla is no pragmatist. And I am not now nor have I ever been an environmentalist. Energy pragmatists like me are happy Khosla is dropping big bucks on cellulosic ethanol, but are far more sober about its potential. I don’t believe even 10% of the energy technology community shares Khosla’s view, whereas at least that many think cellulosic ethanol is a going to be a small part of the solution. The vast majority hope it can be a big part of the solution, but know the jury is out. An interesting story will illustrate my point:

(more…)

If you’re very lucky, you may have a chance to see one particularly provocative play that’s on tour right now. It’s called The Boycott, and its premise is over this thought: what if the absence of global warming policy could mobilize women to practice abstinence as a form of objection?

No, seriously. And global warming isn’t the first to explore the tactic. One review of the play provides background and then some:

The play is a contemporary incarnation of Aristophanes’ comedy Lysistrata, in which women from Athens and Sparta refuse to consort with their husbands until the men have stopped their warring. The twenty-four-hundred-year-old idea has been recently revived, and not only in dramatic form. In 1996, the women of Pergamon, Turkey, denied their husbands until a gold-mining company notorious for its cyanide-leaching techniques was ousted from their village. The women ultimately prevailed.

What’s so captivating about The Boycott, and the perhaps preposterous notion that the global warming movement uses it to garner momentum, is that it jettisons assumptions about what environmental activism should look like; door-to-door canvassing and marches on Washington appear passé in comparison. Indeed the play’s titillating leitmotif combined with its spot-on statistics may even eclipse Al Gore’s infamous PowerPoint presentation.

Unfortunately, the show doesn’t stop in too many cities. But if you are lucky enough to see it, let us know! Otherwise, just think a bit about that banner - “Hot enough for you?” Perhaps a cold bed could solve the trick…

The beginning of the solutions discussion in Hell and High Water (paperback now at Amazon):

This analysis suggests that the United States could reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by between 10 and 40 percent of the 1990 level at very low cost. Some reductions may even be a net savings if the proper policies are implemented.
–U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 1991

What are the winning strategies for avoiding climate catastrophe, for avoiding Hell and High Water? This chapter examines the solutions for the power sector. Amazingly, with the right technology strategy over the next two decades, we could cut U.S. carbon dioxide emissions by two-thirds without increasing the total electric bill of either consumers or businesses….

Related Posts:

• Policies in Need of Californication
• California makes efficiency “business as usual”

The President who said “America is addicted to oil“ now begs the Saudis for another fix. Like some binge-drinking, pill-popping starlet — is there any other kind? — the President is prostrate before his top foreign “dealer,” begging for more, even at the risk of public humiliation:

The Saudi oil minister, however, waited only a short time before announcing that oil prices would remain tied to market forces — a direct slap at Bush.

Wow! When even your dealer won’t sell you more, you have got a real problem.

Just one hour later, though, “President Bush made a private visit to Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah to again ask him to open the spigots.”

That is like being turned down by your dealer and then desperately appealing directly to Pablo Escobar.

Anyone for rehab or, say, plug in hybrids?

I have previously debunked the absurd list of Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) with over 400 names of supposedly “prominent scientists” who supposedly “recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called consensus’ on man-made global warming.” So had many others (and here and here).

At Grist, climate scientist Andrew Dessler, has continued running “The ‘Inhofe 400′ Skeptic of the Day” repeatedly identifying some skeptics who were completely unqualified and others who are qualified but not actually skeptical. His latest posting is so good, parts deserves repeating here. Meteorologist George Waldenberger is on the list. In response, George sent an email to Inhofe’s staffers that began:

Take me off your list of 400 (Prominent) Scientists that dispute Man-Made Global warming claims. I’ve never made any claims that debunk the “Consensus”.

You quoted a newspaper article that’s main focus was scoring the accuracy of local weathermen. Hardly Scientific … yet I’m guessing some of your other sources pale in comparison in terms of credibility.

You also didn’t ask for my permission to use these statements. That’s not a very respectable way of doing “research”.

Yet, as Dessler notes, “he’s still on the list.” Dessler’s other conclusions:

(more…)

In Greenland, Ice and Instability - New York Times, An Andrew Revkin article on the Greenland ice sheet’s accelerating melting (or erosion) rate. Revkin reports on the impact of ice and water flows on Greenland’s landscape and their often underestimated contribution to sea level rise. The article is a general introduction into the complex scientific questions now being explored about Greenland.

F.T.C. Asks if Carbon-Offset Money Is Well Spent - New York Times. “The [Federal Trade Commission] has not updated its environmental advertising guidelines, known as the Green Guides, since 1998. Back then, the agency did not create definitions for phrases that are common now — like renewable energy, carbon offsets and sustainability,” and it is growing wary of ‘greenwashing’ the impact of carbon offsets. As well they should!

Will nations build on climate-change momentum of 2007? - Christian Science Monitor. The CSM looks back and 2007 and ahead to 2008, reflecting primarily on the role of the White House and developing nations in the upcoming climate negotiations.

WEF warns 2008 uncertainties may hurt climate fight - Reuters. “A stronger focus on turbulent financial markets and escalating geopolitical tension in 2008 could prompt governments and companies to neglect less immediate risks such as climate change and food security, the World Economic Forum warned. That, the Geneva-based group said, could make it even harder to deal with these critical, longer-term issues in the future.” This is the first year that both energy security and food security have been evaluated by (and become a central concern of) the WEF.

Climate Change Fueling Malaria in Kenya, Experts Say - National Geographic News. This article discusses the role of climate change in malaria’s spread to regions in Kenya previously untouched by the disease, and it is most likely a forecast of circumstances that will become more and more common in the future.

Not the best state for the climate/fuel economy message, obviously. Still, a bad sign for those who want this issue discussed intelligently in the campaign.

I was watching Fox news coverage of the GOP primary — why not? — and I think it was Bill Kristol who Fred Barnes said, “John McCain is going to have to stop antagonizing conservatives” if he wants to win, since the GOP is a conservative party.

And what precisely was McCain doing to antagonize conservatives? He was “talking about climate change” and pushing the idea of “promoting green technology in Michigan.”

We have a long, long way to go, I’m afraid, before this country can take united action to save the livability of the planet for future generations.