mtneuman’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Bravo! Bravo!

  In my book, Sports Illustrated has hit a home run with its story "Going, Going Green".  The story is topped only by the photo illustration on the front cover of the professional baseball player standing knee deep in water.

  There's still time to pull this one out gang but we have to act fast and we need lots of teamwork.  Leave it to Sports Illustrated to be the igniter. On Balls to the Wall posted 2 years, 8 months ago 1 Response

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Need a Plan for All 50 States?

  Terry Tamminen's success in getting California's governor to push for CO2 emission caps needs to be duplicated in all 50 states.  Every day that goes by that the all 50 States fail to reduce their fuel burning - in their cars, airplanes, houses, commercial businesses, institutions, recreational outlays and factories - pushes us further and further behind the 8-ball.   The sooner that our representatives in state government realize how terribly important it is for them to stop avoiding meaningful action aimed at reducing aggregate greenhouse gas emission from their state, the better.

  Regarding the interview with Terry Tamminen, I would have liked to have read more Tamminen's vision of how states can accomplish CO2 emissions reductions.  There may be some situations that are unique to one state in terms of emissions reductions but for the most part the major emission sources are the same from state to state.   Every state contributes greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere which, for the most part, come from 3 primary sources:  (1) motorized transportation (cars, trucks, airplanes, motorized recreation), (2) space heating and (3) electric power generation and use.  Motorized transportation is the largest contributor.

  In highway transportation, there are essentially three major ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation.  One is to switch to fuels that, when the fuel is burned, emit fewer pounds of greenhouse gases per mile traveled in the vehicle.  Another is to use a more fuel-efficient vehicle that burns less gasoline per mile.  The third way is for those who drive motor vehicles to reduce the number of miles they drive every year, and substitute driving with more fuel-efficient mass transit, bicycle use and walking; or at least car-pooling (or alternatively moving their place of residence or their place of business closer to one another to reduce the number of required miles of travel).  All 50 States have failed miserably on all three of these accounts.
  http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport....

  In the Great Lakes region where I live, in spite of the Union of Concerned Scientists' release of its "Confronting Climate Change in the Great Lakes Region" report in April 2003 at the State Capitol in Madison, the state has done little to reduce the aggregate annual greenhouse gas emissions within the state.  As a member of the Preserve Our Climate Coalition, I actively participated in the press release and news conference on the report -- a report that was authored by 14 prominent Midwest university scientists and that projected serious economic, health, environmental and economic consequences to the state from the continued buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere if actions were not taken to reduce aggregate greenhouse gas emissions. The event failed to stir action by the state's governmental representatives at every level.  

  Wisconsin's annual carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fuel burning increased 26% from 1990 to 2004, resulting in 31 million more tons of CO2 emitted to the atmosphere from Wisconsin sources in 2004 compared to 1990 (122 million vs. 91 million tons).  And since CO2 is additive (builds up) in the atmosphere from year to year, this means Wisconsin added approximately 1.5 additional billion tons of CO2 gas to the atmosphere during that 15 year period.  Business has continued as usual in Wisconsin, despite the public release of the report.

  In April 2005, the Preserve Our Climate Coalition presented state lawmakers and the governor with their "Wisconsin Climate Change Petition", containing the names of over 500 residents of the state demanding the state to establish climate change legislation, including a program that would provide positive financial incentives to citizens who minimize motorized travel and energy use in the home on a yearly and per capita basis. It is doubtful that many of them took the time to even read the petition since they did nothing about it in response.

  Although state legislators did manage to pass (and the governor signed) an energy bill last spring, which set goals for renewable energy sources in utility plants, the law omitted the whole area of reducing greenhouse gas from transportation the largest end-use sector emitter in Wisconsin.  In the area of electric power generation, coal still dominates as a fuel source in Wisconsin, supplying more than two-thirds of the state's power plants according the U.S. Energy Information Administration.  More and larger coal burning plants in Wisconsin have been approved since 2003 and are presently under construction.

  Several years ago now, I authored a strategy to address the largest contributors to global warming on a statewide basis in Wisconsin. While not implemented, the concept may still have merit.

  In a nutshell, the strategy is for government to reward citizens and families who conserved energy by offering financial incentives to them to reduce activities that contribute the most greenhouse gas emissions.  Funding sources would be the same as those already in place, but instead of financing  more highway expansion and power plant construction, the moneys collected would go back to the public as rebates at the end of the year.

  I'm providing a link to paper I wrote that document the proposal, below.  Also included is a copy of the letter to the people I sent the proposal to.
  http://www.danenet.org/bcp2006/neuman_gw.pdf
  
  www.madison.com/communities/preserveourclimate
  On An interview with California environmental adviser Terry Tamminen posted 2 years, 10 months ago 8 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  What About Driving Less?

  Why didn't you talk about the need for people to  DRIVE LESS?  That's the surest way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicle driving, and it can be done with either a fuel saver or a gas gulping vehicle.

  FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR REDUCING HIGHWAY TRAVEL
  AND ENERGY DEMANDS IN WISCONSIN
  http://www.danenet.org/bcp2006/vmr.pdfOn John Dingell talks to Grist about climate change, fuel economy, and the 110th Congress posted 2 years, 10 months ago 17 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Appreciate Your Extra Effort

  Excellent!  It's good to see the Bush administration's recalcitrance on the global warming fight has finally made it to the judicial powers that be.  It's too bad it took this long.

  One of the comments I sent to the U.S. EPA admininstor when he was deciding to accept or reject responsibility for regulating CO2 emissions from tailpipes was that air quality in the U.S. will get worse with global warming (because ozone levels and fine particle in the air will naturally increase with rising temperature and humidity).  I wish someone had brought that up to the court, since the EPA regulates those pollutants now already.

  Scalia's comments seem to reflect an understanding that "the atmosphere" is somewhere off in the wild blue yonder and thus shouldn't concern us much.  Someone needs to tell him that the atmosphere is also all around us here on the surface, and that we breathe it and live in it everyday - CO2, oxygen, nitrogen, water vapor and all!  

  Jay Leno had Al Gore on his show last night.  Jay asked Big Al to fill him in on the case.  Big Al mentioned what Justice Scalia said - that he didn't want to deal with the issue of global warming, and then he added that the judge should have felt the same way about the 2000 elections.  (Score one for the good guy.)

  Has the court finished hearing introductory arguments already or are there more to come?  Anyone know?On The justices speak posted 2 years, 11 months ago 7 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Bike to Wal-Mart Day?

  Have you ever tried to ride your bicycle to a Wal-Mart store?  How about walking to one?  Taking the bus?  

  Forget it!  Most (all?) Wal-Marts stores are inaccessible other than by automobile, SUV or pick-up truck.  They all draw their customers from the largest possible area, are located on a major highway, are huge big box stores and have parking lots which cover hundreds of acres with asphalt parking lots.   People drive many miles to take advantage of their savings, rather than walking, bicycling, or taking the bus to a local store to shop. By design, Wal-Mart stores cannot possibly be green.  Not the Wal-Mart stores as we know them today.On Al Gore takes his green message to Wal-Mart headquarters posted 3 years, 3 months ago 9 Responses