Last week I reviewed the top ten green stories of 2006. But looking back is easy. What's going to happen in 2007?
I have no clue. But being wrong carries no penalty in U.S. punditry, so I'm going to make a few predictions anyway. Twenty, to be specific.
In 2007:
- Al Gore will a) win an Oscar, b) announce that he is not running for president, c) continue his efforts at grassroots movement building, and d) announce plans for a sequel to An Inconvenient Truth.
- No developed country will consume less oil or emit less CO2 in 2007 than it did in 2006.
- There will be sound and fury over farm- and price-support systems, talk about "renewable energy," and lip service paid to organic and small-scale agricultural practices, but in the end, the 2007 Farm Bill will do little to alter the basic dysfunctional shape of U.S. ag policy.
- An amount of money sufficient to reduce U.S. demand for fossil fuels by at least 25% will be spent on the Iraq war. Instead of the enormous returns the former investment would bring in health and economic vitality, we will reap higher deficits, international resentment, dead Iraqis, dead U.S. soldiers, and a spiral of violence and escalation in the Middle East.
- CAFE standards will not be raised.
- Nobody will drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
- Toyota will become the world's biggest automaker and the Prius will remain the best-selling hybrid; GM will continue to sink under legacy health-care costs and crappy cars. The taxpayer bailout won't come until 2009.
- Zero-energy houses will become the newest status symbol for the ultra-rich.
- Most big businesses, all entertainment ventures, and several dozen college campuses will, as a matter of ongoing policy, make their activities carbon neutral through the purchase of carbon offsets. Consumers will be offered offsets at every travel agency or car rental business; offsets will start popping up in strange venues -- packaged with car insurance, in displays at gas station counters, as a checkout option in PayPal, eBay, and other online vendors, etc.
- Almost single-handedly, Wal-Mart will transform the solar power industry, the organic fiber industry, the organic food industry, the building industry, and the retail industry. OK, maybe not by the end of 2007.
- The release of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) will prompt lots of people to say lots of very stupid things.
- Laurie David's Stop Global Warming "virtual march" will reach 1 million signatories.
- In Mass. v. EPA, the Supreme Court will rule for Mass. on both counts in a 5-4 split vote. A great while later, the EPA will issue auto tailpipe regulations that will have already been made irrelevant by state-level regs.
- The number of cities involved in the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement will top 450; the number of states involved in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative -- or some extended variant thereof -- will top 12, including California. By the end of 2007, a de facto U.S. global warming policy will have taken shape entirely without federal involvement. That will either be an amazing expression of democracy or an historical failure, depending on your perspective.
- TXU will be stopped.
- Sen. James Inhofe's rants from the Senate Environment Committee will become so disconnected from reality that his constituents will finally get fed up and boot him in 2008, Pombo-style. His media lackey Marc Morano will return to his true calling, selling used cars.
- A great deal of money will be wasted on ethanol.
- No nuclear plants will be built in the U.S.
- The U.S. military will become the largest consumer of clean energy and clean-energy technology.
- Somewhere out in the rural hinterlands, the very last surviving climate "skeptic" will finally, mercifully STFU.
Oh, and one more:
21. Grist will kick ass.
Contributors, commenters -- join me with your own prognostications!
Cautious optimism for Copenhagen deal as Barcelona climate talks end
Another coal plant bites the dust
Barcelona outcome: White House strategy is plea for more time
Comments
View as Flat
Stentor Posted 7:40 am
31 Dec 2006
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 7:58 am
31 Dec 2006
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
willa Posted 10:18 am
31 Dec 2006
It also isn't really true that houses used to be built better or worse than they are now. The houses that are still around from previous periods tend to be better built than the average new house; that's why they're still here. In fact, a great many houses were and are constructed shoddily to satisfy customers who want more than they can afford, and those houses aren't around for long in any era.
One thing that's going to limit the longevity of both the McMansions themselves and of the fad making such things desirable will be the technological overconfidence that goes into such a project. Rich people, and wannabe-rich people, may not care when they buy a new house what it will look like in 20 years, but they will sure care 20 years later. Bad designs only continue to be desirable until their obvious and disastrous flaws become apparent and sufficient to overwhelm the perceived advantages, which is why you don't see a lot of bubble skylights anymore. When the big ugly houses built in the last ten years start to decay, people will look at even well-maintained examples and see decay. Only when the tackiness of the decay exceeds the status conveyed by the size and the "village" effect of the interminable collections of pointless extra roof pitches will people really want something else.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 3:12 pm
31 Dec 2006
Experienced contractors have learned this the hard way and that is why they are hesitant to try new ideas like mounting solar panels on perfectly good roofs.
The worst design seen in Seattle is the stucco sided home with a flat roof. The style has come up from California and is the dumbest design possible for a place where it rains for months at a time.
Modern building codes and building permits make sure houses meet minimum standards that are much higher than typical houses of old built without those things. I am intimately familiar with the thousands of century old houses that populate the single family zoned neighborhoods surrounding downtown Seattle. All new houses are better built. This includes the plumbing, wiring, and windows. Plywood is far superior in shear to tounge and groove, sheetrock is far superior to lathe and plaster. All joists rafters and beams meet code defined deflection criteria. Footings are also far bigger. Put on a good roof, siding and the rest is just for show.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
GMB Posted 7:25 pm
31 Dec 2006
Since the data doesn't support the likelihood of catastrophic global warming the people who are onto this scientific fraud will multiply even as the costly policies that you crowd have foisted upon us are being applied.
Come up with the evidence champ and you won't need to be a smartarse.
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 7:06 am
01 Jan 2007
People also get angry and disagree which is healthy, but generally they work real hard to respect other posters. Call it the Grismill culture. Take some advice, resist the urge to use words like idiot, champ, and smartarse when referring to your debate opponents. Most of us learned not to do that in elementary school via the "bounces off me, sticks to you rule."
State your arguments, defend them and cite your sources. Your arguments will stand or fall depending on how well you can do that. In all honesty, comments like the above are worthless. A bunch of words strung together, no argument, no sources, just worthless. You do know what a troll is right? You don't want to be labeled as a troll right? No one at this forum is angered by your short, empty comments, and most certainly they are not being swayed by them, so my advice is to either take it up a notch or find something more useful to do with your time ...seriously.
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
GMB Posted 7:20 am
01 Jan 2007
As for politeness you cqn forget that for starters. Your movement is not merely fraudulent. You actually want to impose costs on the rest of us. And you spend all your time slandering people who disagree.
Don't tell me about polite Gristmill culture siince thats a lie. I've just seen abuse of Inhofe and Bob Carter. Two people smart enough to find you clowns out and brave enough to try and combat your malevolence.
I don't need to cite any sources. Because you guys won't come up with any evidence. And you all know that we are in an ice age.
You guys are just playing silly-buggers.
Permalink
GMB Posted 7:27 am
01 Jan 2007
"All views are welcome, but polite, well articulated and defended ones are especially valued. Tolerance of diverse viewpoints is the strength of this site. Humor, sarcastic and otherwise is icing on the cake."
Here you are really making a lying claim that I'm not explaiining myself clearly. And you are reserving the right for sarcasm to one side only.
Now look you guys are doing the wrong thing and perpetuating a fraud that will be immensely costly. That has already been immensely costly.
So its time you put up a case in open debate and not instead tried to set things up in advance to close it down.
Now have you got some evidence fella?
Have you got some evidence for the likelihood of catastrophic warming? As opposed to catastrophic cooling?
Well lets hear it then?
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 11:38 am
01 Jan 2007
I try to avoid the global warming discussions because it is being handled really well by others. Go here for example. Grab yourself a pint some night, sit back and read it. It is probably more than you want to hear, and it isn't possible that everything is correct, but the arguments are many and most are well defended. Maybe your challenge to a debate will be taken up, but not by me.
I put up one post on the topic here.
Keep in mind that very few people here fit the environmentalist stereotype you have in your head, whatever it is, in its totality or at all, just as I am sure you don't fit the conservative redneck stereotype.
Wouldn't it have been fun to be a fly on the wall to watch the attacks on Darwin when he first published Origins? Believe it or not, the vast majority of Americans don't buy it to this day. If they can't be convinced of that, what chance is there of convincing everyone that global warming is a reality?
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
bookerly Posted 1:01 pm
01 Jan 2007
Dear BioD,
GMB is clearly a troll. One species that is certainly not endangered. If he wanted to discuss Global Warming or see any of the evidence, Grist has done more to discuss the issue at a very basic elementary level than ANY place I've seen.
You linked to the series, it continues. It doesn't take much intelligence to find it if one really wants to. Anyway, your politeness to trolls is a credit to you. (smile).
As to the list, I would not bet on either 15 or 16, but they certainly would be high on my wish list.
Personally, I am lousy at predicting the future, so will leave that to those who are wiser and have better foresight!
patrick
Permalink
Biodiversivist Posted 1:44 pm
01 Jan 2007
In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world
Permalink
froggy Posted 11:20 pm
01 Jan 2007
2 Alt energy stocks become even hotter.
3 Global warming turns into a major political issue and Al will have to enter the race. maybe as not THE guy but he will throw his ever growing political power to sway the Dem. candidate. They will need Al to win.
4 Green becomes the new black.
froggy
Permalink
GMB Posted 1:04 am
02 Jan 2007
Now since I've found you out.....
Have you sir... got any evidence for the likelihood of catastrophic global warming?
NO????
I.... DIDN'T..... THINKSO!!!!
Permalink
GMB Posted 1:07 am
02 Jan 2007
No evidence to be found there.
No evidence of anything but cultic behaviour.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:08 am
02 Jan 2007
You tube combined with blogs will provide the initial publicity to make that happen.
Government will ignore it all. Corporations will put up even bigger mass media smokescreens featuring "new, safer, waste recycling" nuclear reactors, "clean' coal, fuel farming, and the new, improved hydrogen powered economy!!
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:15 am
02 Jan 2007
"Since the data doesn't support the likelihood of catastrophic global warming the people who are onto this scientific fraud will multiply even as the costly policies that you crowd have foisted upon us are being applied."
I don't see any argument there at all. Or evidence.
On the other hand we have a correlation of interaction between GHG levels and temperature going back 100s of thousands of years verified by all the peer reviewed research.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog
Permalink
swozniak Posted 4:43 am
02 Jan 2007
More people will contribute to carbon offsets, but overlook news that only re-planting tropical rainforests (not Northern Hemisphere forests) will help capture excess CO2.
So adopt an acre from Nature Conservancy.
Shawn
http://thegoodthebadandthegreen.com
Permalink
willa Posted 3:39 pm
02 Jan 2007
I hate sheetrock with an unholy passion. Lath and plaster kicks ass. Likewise plywood vs t&g. So you won't get me to agree with you on that Houses need to move and breathe and be repairable, rather than having to have entire sections replaced at once.
But it should be illegal to build Mediterranean-style houses in the Apcific Northwest. It should be illegal to build frame houses in the desert. Etc, etc. 'Course, it should also be illegal to put vinyl siding on a perfectly intact clapboard house that just needs paint, given how vinyl does nothing to insulate, rots the wood, and can actually take away the wood siding's natural r-value by keeping it damp. No, I'm not one for modern materials.
You might enjoy reading some preservation literature, and some related architecture stuff. The National Park Service has some great Preservation Briefs, some of which go into energy issues in old buildings. I also highly recommend Stewart Brand's How Buildings Learn, which is mostly a sort of iconoclastic look at how architects can be dumb, and how buildings can succeed anyway. He was a Whole-Earth-Catalog person, so that tells you a bit about him--and he is a little nutty, but in a good way. That book had some of my preservation classmates pretty steamed, but I enjoyed it!
Permalink
silvergryph Posted 10:11 am
04 Jan 2007
A groundswell of private citizens making (and demanding) real environmental changes in their lives will do more to beat prediction #2 than all the international meetings of countries with and without the intention of doing anything about climate change.
Another, less optimistic prediction: Arctic sea life will watch in horror as the ice island the size of Manhattan which broke off of Ellesmere Island shears off oil rigs in the Beaufort Sea in the summer.
If that isn't a sign...
Permalink
JohnF Posted 6:45 am
05 Jan 2007
Permalink
sunflower Posted 7:29 am
05 Jan 2007
Permalink
JohnF Posted 2:48 pm
06 Jan 2007
I predict more discussion of the root causes of our ecological plight. And I'm trying to make that happen (those root causes = population growth and corporate economic growth in interaction with per capita consumption rates)
Permalink
Storm Dragon Posted 4:50 pm
06 Jan 2007
Most likely scenario-the fence remains unfunded, preventing its construction for the present, but keeping it as a potential menace for the future.
Optomistic scenario-environmental groups and activists all over the country awaken to the danger and raise a tremendous outcry. Under pressure from the people, Congress consigns this appalling project to the rubbish bin, and sets to work crafting an immigration policy that might actually do some good in the world.
Pessemistic scenario-construction on the fence gets underway, effectively damaging or destroying wilderness areas in the southwest, ending all hope of the return of the jaguar, and doing incalculable harm to the ocelot, the desert bighorn, and the Sonoran pronghorn. Meanwhile, illegal immigration into the U.S. continues, as desperate people find new ways to enter the country.
It's up to us. Which is it going to be?
Permalink
bookerly Posted 6:40 pm
07 Jan 2007
Your option number one is interesting, but I suspect that it is unlikely, since Congress may feel a need to throw some red meat (in the form a fence) to the attack dogs of the right.
I suspect that we will see some sort of so-called "immigration reform" from the current Congress. It will probably follow the path of a lot of labor contracts, in that it will protect the current immigrants (through some sort of token requirement that they do something before being put on the path of naturalization), while sacrificing future immigrants (by creating and codifying a second class status for them and ensuring that they have no rights while here and are more easily shipped back.
(This will do nothing about future undocumented workers, who will be left to fend for themselves for least the near term. Congress will pretend that only people who are already here and those willing to come in semi-servitude actually exist.)
So, a combination of two and three is most likely (not the good parts).
Frankly, no one in American (pretty much) cares about the American poor, so it is unreasonable to expect them to care about poor people who can't vote.
patrick
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 3:08 am
08 Jan 2007
Here's my 2007 Predictions
(1) People will read the ANDRILL studies that clearly show the ice shelf has grown and retreated at least 50 times in the past and that global climate change is a regular, natural thing.
(2) People in Boston and New York City will be featured in a documentary saying things like "I hate snow" and "warm weather in December...cool!"
(3) Fusion will have a breakthrough as will fuel cells and solar and oil prices will plummet as people realize that oil is no longer necessary.
(4) The Democrats will whine about "reform" and then promptly try to create as many subsidies for "biofuels" (read: agribusiness) as ever. They will try to raise taxes to fund their backers with frontman Al Gore leading the way.
(5) People will start questioning the energy usage of billionaires (who often appear in Grist telling us one-bedroom apartment dwellers to "save energy"). Their eyes will open to who really steals the resources of the earth, and who is using them minimally.
(6) Bush will get all the recognition he deserves for funding real alternative energy projects -- hydrogen -- and making the breakthroughs described in (3) possible.
(7) Al Gore should win an Oscar...for Best Actor in a Comedy. But George Bush should win a Nobel Prize for taking the hard path and leading us to true energy breakthroughs...that let us, as Mitsui Kaku describes, make ourselves into a Level 1 Society (having the power of a sun at our disposal).
(8) Green Acres, Petticoat Junction and Beverly Hillbillies, will not be so damned relevent! (Sorry, that was Gil Scott Heron's prediction). Next.
The Texeme Construct offers international text memetics construction and textcasting services.
Permalink