Comments Ana Unruh Cohen has made

I second caniscandida; Fareed is ok

Zakaria does not deserve to be lumped in with Will and Samuelson. I urge everyone to read his column and judge for yourself.

I agree with Dave that there is plenty we can do to prevent catastrophic climate change, and the two reports he mentions are examples of the potential out there. We need to adopt policies at all levels of government that get us on this track asap.

But we are already experiencing climate change impacts and will do so regardless of changes to our energy policy so we can't ignore preparations for those impacts. Besides much of what we should do to increase are preparedness has other environmental benefits, like restoring wetlands in coastal areas, limiting further development in the coast, better preparing for the inevitable droughts especially in the west and midwest, etc.

As with most things there is potential to use adaptation as an excuse for inaction or to build things that actually make things worse, like some levees I can think of on the Gulf Coast. But if you couple preparedness with a strong program to reduce emissions, I think you can avoid that. Sens. Kerry and Snowe have included language in their recently introduced global warming bill (S. 485) that would help communities assess their climate change vulnerabilities and better prepare for them. The major part of the bill is a cap and trade program, but by including some impact assessment in their bill they have struck a good balance.

Our major effort certainly needs to be intransforming our energy system, but we can't ignore preparation for impacts, especially when they have other environmental benefits as well. As Zakaria says in his final sentences: "Mitigation and adaptation complement each other. In both cases, the crucial need is to stop talking and start acting." On It's seductive -- and wrong posted 2 years, 9 months ago 54 Responses

Reaching the target

One thing I like about Bill's argument for cap and trade was the idea of being able to set the reductions you want to achieve in the future. How do we figure out where to set the tax to achieve the same goals? What tax level would you propose to be able to reach the same benchmarks that say the US-CAP coalition support? On Why carbon taxes trump cap-and-trade posted 2 years, 9 months ago 18 Responses

yawn

I'm too tired to fight d41295's Pelosi plane smear. Luckily my colleagues already have. On Tell it like it is, Nancy posted 2 years, 9 months ago 4 Responses

That's Factiness, Dave

Stephen Colbert explains it here. On Exxon brightens tone posted 2 years, 10 months ago 2 Responses

prop 87 lives!

Much of what is in today's announcement is similar to goals and protocols of Prop 87, like reducing gasoline consumption by 20% in 2020 (prop 87's goal was 25% by 2017) and using "protocols for measuring the 'life-cycle carbon intensity' of transportation fuels." This new proposal is a little bit cleaner policy-wise. Executive orders give you a little more latitude than ballot initiatives.

So glad the prop 87 campaign could help lay the ground work for California's latest policy innovation. On In which I'm right about everything posted 2 years, 10 months ago 1 Response

power distribution requirements?

I don't know if this is the case in the Northwest but in the Northeast there are rules for some of the major dams about which states get to use what percentage of the electricity produced. If there are rules along those lines out west then I think there will be a floor to the potential power shift that you rightfully point out could be a big problem.

One place to go to help all of the west adopt the CA guidelines is the Western Govenors Association. It seems like they have been pretty forward leaning on renewables. I wonder if it is under discussion there as part of their big energy plan.  On New California power regs might hurt coal ... or not posted 2 years, 11 months ago 6 Responses

So you'd prefer the alternative?

Notice I said "read them and smile." Not "read them and pack up our job is done here."

We definitely have more work to do to build the public's understanding and support for environmental issues, but I think these polls results are encouraging.

I'd rather have the public thinking about energy and global warming that not, even if the issues are tied up with their other concerns like Iraq and the economy. Maybe that is even better. The polling I've seen over the past two years suggests that the public is developing a more sophisticated understanding of energy and climate change issues, even as they complain as gasoline prices go up.

And I agree that concern about gas prices does not equal environmentally sound voting, but overall the issues the GQR memo point out helped the Democrats are important. Namely their opposition to subsidies for the oil industry, talking about the potential for renwables to strengthen the economy, and the importance energy issues played in voters perception that the Democrats had new ideas and were thinking about the future.

Many groups are working hard to educate lawmakers that our energy policy has to be about more than the price at the pump. There is clearly a lot to be done on the issue, but I think it is moving in the right direction and these post-election poll results help that.

To the issue of everybody saying something is important when asked, I think the Zogby poll calls that into question since half of those polled said it wasn't important! But yes giving an open ended opportunity to answer or a list can be more insightful. I believe the GQR poll used a list methodology to asses energy price issues for their key groups. See page 2 of the pdf memo.  On Energy polled high in voter concern this past election posted 3 years ago 3 Responses

we need the gavels

and to get those we need 51 senators caucausing with the Democrats. 50/50 leaves the likes of Inhofe calling the shots. So all eyes on the Virginia recount. Good news is that Webb is ahead and the last election when VA did a recount it only changed the out come by less than 100 votes. Bad news is it took until the middle of December. On In Montana posted 3 years ago 7 Responses

Join the vision

If you like the report, I hope you will choose to sign the vision statement as well.

This report is a major reason for my absence from the blog in recent months so I hope you all like it! On Optimistic posted 3 years, 2 months ago 3 Responses

whatever you do

don't fly at night. On Beanies and the jets posted 3 years, 3 months ago 2 Responses

Rep. Waxman

He doesn't get as much press, but he has some good ideas too. On Kerry energy speech posted 3 years, 5 months ago 2 Responses

great movie! go see it!

I had a chance to see a sneak peak. Grist readers should catch it if they can! On Interview with makers of Who Killed the Electric Car? posted 3 years, 5 months ago 7 Responses

small but telling mistake?

Lindzen (and WSJ fact checkers) fail to get Dr. Oreskes's first name correct. It's Naomi, not Nancy.  If Lindzen is going to bash her study, the least he can do is get her name right...On Lindzen: dishonest; News anchors: stupid posted 3 years, 5 months ago 20 Responses

clarification of the clarification

Donata's paper was published as a Brevia piece, short, less than 800 word pieces, which might explain why the work was so limited in scope. But Brevia submissions are peer-reviewed before publication. I think Science knew exactly that the piece would stir controversy and was relevant for policy makers since they first published it online in Science Express, a way to get it out a few weeks before the hard copy is available. On Inconvenient science posted 3 years, 5 months ago 32 Responses

Why does it have to be either or?

Seems to me we need to be working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and preparing for the impacts - at home and helping abroad - that are already occuring and will only get worse. Global warming might give us the leverage to get things done on the planning and preparedness side that Dave rightly points out we should be doing anyway and that environmentalists have long championed. My colleauge, Bracken Hendricks, has been working on just this idea. On Adaptation redux posted 3 years, 5 months ago 3 Responses

Yes, read it!

I can't say that I actually have read the whole thing, but I've read a lot. You should too, either by buying it or reading Dave's excerpts.

You can learn more about the project and how you can participate here. On Americans and Climate Change: Intro and executive summary posted 3 years, 6 months ago 11 Responses

Warner on Warming

Other Democratic presidential hopefuls are talking about the nexus between our energy policy and global warming. You can get a taste of Mark Warner's thoughts here. On Climate crisis and the 2008 election posted 3 years, 6 months ago 14 Responses

CO2 not the only culprit

There are numerous natural and increasingly human variables that can influence global average temperature. This is one of my favorite papers on the subject. The graphs show the comparison of observed temperature change with the changes that would result from just human activities, just natural flucuations, and with the human and natural combined. As you can see the one that fits the observed temperature the best is humans + nature. Work has now been done on the observed ocean warming, with similar results. So maybe we humans aren't soley responsible but our fingerprints are at the crime scene too. On The global warming dilemma posted 3 years, 7 months ago 14 Responses

replay on CSPAN3 on Monday (4/24) evening

In case you don't have anything better to do at 8:30 pm EDT tonight, the panel is being replayed on Cspan 3 (check your local listings). You can also watch it on-line anytime for the next week or so on the cspan website. Search for Center for American Progress under videos and it should come up at the top of the list. On Global-warming glamour shots posted 3 years, 7 months ago 4 Responses

Real dimming

Real Climate has more on the science behind the show. On A bipolar solar disorder posted 3 years, 7 months ago 12 Responses

Shameless Plugging

Not only is it all the stories Dave mentions, we also need to use all the mediums to reach the public that we can. The Center for American Progress is starting a series on "Climate and Culture" next week. We are kicking off with an exploration of "the arts." For Gristmill readers in the area, please join us Thursday at lunch time. (Please RSVP as well.) Others will eventually be able to watch a video of the panel on our website. Rumor has it CSPAN may even carry it live. If so, I'll be sure to add to my shameless plugging.  On Global warming is not a scientific story posted 3 years, 7 months ago 4 Responses

environmental science policy

For those interested in a career in environment and science, don't discount your policy options. Lord knows we need more people with technical backgrounds working on the policy side of things. After earning my Ph.D. in earth sciences (and a BS in chemistry), I had a chance to work for Congress. It changed my life! (I met my now husband as an added bonus!) I've now been working on the policy side of things for 4.5 years and loving it.

The one crucial qualification is to communicate well. If you are interested in this route make sure you  hone your writing and speaking skills - two things that are often neglected in science degree programs.On An eco-career guru answers reader mail posted 3 years, 7 months ago 6 Responses

What to do about it

My coworkers at the Center for American Progress and Linda Greer from NRDC have put out a paper on what we should be doing about security at chemical plants. The major issue is switching to less hazardous processes which has both security and environmental benefits. The Center will be putting out some new work on this soon so stay tuned.  On Chemical plant security posted 3 years, 8 months ago 1 Response

Automotive X Prize

You don't need NSF. The X Prize guys are starting up an automotive prize. Should be fun to see what happens! On Billion dollar idea posted 3 years, 8 months ago 12 Responses

so tough

This was a good week. It's so hard to make a decision...On The Daily Grist Headline Battle Royale: Match 3 posted 3 years, 8 months ago 2 Responses

Worth talking about

The Center for American Progress hosted a one-day conference examining a similar proposition back in December. I don't think the idea is "conventional wisdom" inside the beltway yet, but some people are talking about it. Changing farm policy is still a huge political challenge.On Switchgrass: The magic wand that transforms crappy biofuels policy into gold posted 3 years, 8 months ago 11 Responses

now onto electricity!

Definitely an idea who's time has come. Now we need something similar for electricity. On A simple change that can help utilities and their customers conserve energy posted 3 years, 8 months ago 1 Response

sustainable transportation

After reading through everyone's comments thus far, I come back to where I was when I read Dave's first draft of the exercise-formerly-known-as-the-green-manifesto. That is on the index card we should be calling for what we want in a transportation system, not trying to use our own personal crystal balls with their own particular biases. The amazing Dr. Ana has hers; the amazing Dr X has his (or is it hers?), etc.

So what do we want and how do we say it? When I think of sustainable transporation systems it has a lot of walking, biking, sharing, etc with technologies that are renewable and (dare I dream?) resorative to the Earth. It would leave room for incremental improvement and radical change.

Perhaps we need to start looking at transportation the way Amory Lovins encourages us to look at electricity - not as the electrons through the wires but the services it provides, i.e. the lights, computer power, the cold beer.  That way we can focus on the best way to solve each transportation issue, rather than which if any technology is going to be THE answer. On What's sustainable? posted 3 years, 9 months ago 72 Responses

Dude!

I should have thought of that for DC gristers!

Have fun! On Two eco-events upcoming in NYC posted 3 years, 9 months ago 2 Responses

the other outrage

This story again perpetuates the myth, at least currently, that nuclear power could help us cut our dependence on oil. The sub-headline is Bush Plan Could Cut Dependence on Oil but Relies on Unproven Technologies, and the article starts with "President Bush's new nuclear energy initiative is supposed to help cure America's 'addiction to oil'..." Of course there is no further discussion of how nukes would decrease our use of oil, so what's the general reader to do? Accept it as true? It allows the Pres to sell his bad idea by setting it up as a cure to something the public is waking up to as a bad idea, our oil dependence, even though the two have nothing to with each other now or even the next few decades. Unfortunately, the mixing of oil and electricity is a bipartisan mistake. On Bush's plan could take up to 50 years, and for what? posted 3 years, 9 months ago 5 Responses

silver shotgun

Although it gets dangerously close to a Dick Cheney joke these days, my talking point on alternative energy is that we need a silver shotgun approach, not a silver bullet.

And Bart if you are signing up spokeswomen for Peak Oil, I'm ready to go. On Jon Stewart interviews an oil analyst, who basically blows it posted 3 years, 9 months ago 41 Responses

Maybe not all the fault of hybrids

As today's Washington Post points out, all of the greater Washington DC region's traffic has been getting worse. Absent hybrid incentives, those HOV lanes probably would have been getting worse anyway.

(Although the news isn't all bad. Apparently the addition of a new HOV lane on a Maryland stretch of road has improved things.)

As an occasional user of the already crowded DC area HOV lanes, I never thought it was a great idea to allow single passenger hybrids into them, but the reasoning was not totally flawed. The two main reasons publicly presented by Virginia politicians for adopting the HOV incentives were:

1. Hybrid drivers would save gasoline all the time they drive their vehicles, not just during their daily commutes.
   
2. These incentives would spark the development and adoption of new technology, i.e. hybrid gasoline-electric vehicles.

Uh I meant the Colbert Report

Sorry, Stephen! Please don't put me on the "dead to me list!"On And the award for truthiness goes to ... posted 3 years, 9 months ago 4 Responses

Learn more

You can learn more about the idea by reading the white (or should it be green?) paper that my colleague, Bracken Hendricks, and others wrote to help develop the legislation. On Obama and Inslee propose to save the American auto industry by paying it to do the smart thing posted 3 years, 9 months ago 4 Responses

Extended Producer Responsibility

Great stuff on EPR by the folks at the Product Policy Project. Check it out! On Internet shopping and the environment posted 3 years, 10 months ago 2 Responses

Budget update

House Republican leadership kicked the can down the road. They pulled the budget from the floor today and sent everyone home early for Vet's Day weekend.

Another crucial reason that the moderate R's have been empowered is that the D's were united in their opposition to the budget. R leadership had no where to look but their own party to find the needed votes. Having swung right to appease the extreme right wing of the party, they lost their moderates with all sorts of horrible cuts on the poor, students, etc.

Ah that pesky governing thing really gets in the way of the talking points...On House moderates: Little, late posted 4 years ago 3 Responses

Head to the library, Fred!

In 1859 while America was moving closer to civil war, British scientist John Tydnall was trying to determine if any gases absorbed heat. He found two - water vapour vapor and carbon dioxide - and dutifully wrote up his findings. You could send Fred a copy to set him straight.

Here's the citation:
Tyndall, John (1861). "On the Absorption and Radiation of Heat by Gases and Vapours..." Philosophical Magazine ser. 4, 22: 169-94, 273-85.

Or you could check out Spencer Weart's excellent The Discovery of Global Warming on-line or in your local bookstore. On RenewAmerica columnist claims posted 4 years ago 11 Responses

More math please!

I have to agree with the prof here. We need more and better math education in this country. Innumeracy lets people get away with all sorts of things. For example, using big numbers to make people think things won't work (see my comment on solar power).

I agree with Dave that we are all cognitive misers (love that term!) in some form, but I think more math tools in the decision-making tool boxex of Americans would only help the environment. On Being 'right' about peak oil is only the first step posted 4 years, 3 months ago 9 Responses

Delay Coverage in the Progress Report

If you didn't get this in your in-box this morning, it is worth a read.

"The book of nature is always open." - Louis Agassiz

Gentlemen, start the arm twisting!

Next week could be crucial for the energy bill. Rep. Barton who is chairing the conference has set an ambitious schedule. Rumors are already flying about deals being struck. I suspect we'll see some arms twisting faster than a windmill in a strong Kansas breeze (racking up the production tax credit along the way...) Allegedly a mtbe liability wiaver would stay-in the bill coupled with an at least partially industry funded cleanup trust fund. As for the RPS, it would stay in but be expanded to include nuclear power and clean coal. In the realm of taxes, a number is floating around - $13 billion - but how that get handed out will be the big issue. I wouldn's say passage is a "slam dunk" yet, but I think the odds are rising... stay tuned.On New Mexico Sen. Jeff Bingaman chats about global warming and the heated climate around the energy bi posted 4 years, 4 months ago 1 Response

but not for window cleaners

The building itself will probably remain a bird-killer though, just like the original towers.

"The book of nature is always open." - Louis Agassiz

Working on it

The Worldwatch Institute and the German government have just announced that they are working on this very thing.

Two crucial paragraphs from their press release:

"Soaring oil prices, growing security concerns, and farmers' search for new markets have combined to create a super-charged market for biofuels, boosting consumption by 70 percent over the past three years," said Worldwatch Institute president Christopher Flavin. "With country after country adopting tax breaks and regulations designed to boost the use of biofuels, it is urgent that governments assess strategies for maximizing the economic, social, and environmental benefits of biofuels development."

The biofuels project will also assess the broader impacts of large-scale development of biofuels, focusing on the implications for the size of farms, the health of rural communities, the energy and chemical requirements of agriculture, impacts on rural landscapes and biodiversity, air and water quality, climate change, and international trade balances.

"The book of nature is always open." - Louis Agassiz

Defeated, but close(!)

The Cantwell amendment was defeated this afternoon 47 to 53, with 8 Republicans voting for it and 2 Democrats voting against it.

"The book of nature is always open." - Louis Agassiz

House will do Bush's dirty work

Bush won't have to deal with the veto an energy bill with an RPS or CO2 caps dilemma because the House leadership won't let a bill with those issues out of a conference committee. "Smokey" Joe Barton will be the conference chair after all. House Republican leadership doesn't even want the words "climate change" in the bill, let alone something that would do something about it, although they might let Sen. Hagel's "all carrot and no stick" amendment get through if they had to. I'd be very happy to eat my words, but I don't think Bush will have to worry about vetoing an energy bill that comes out of conference. Of course, the mtbe issue mays still kill the bill....

Hopefully some of Sen. Grassley's tax language has a chance of surviving the conference too.

"The book of nature is always open." - Louis Agassiz

More on Bush Ranch

This Cowboy and Indians article has more on the Bush ranch.

"The book of nature is always open." - Louis Agassiz

Amen, Dave!

This illogical logic really chaps my hide too. (And you know I'm mad when I start actually sounding like a Texan). The other trick people like to use to knock down renewables is to say that they couldn't meet 100% of our electricity needs. Last time I checked no single source provides all of our electricity.

There was an op-ed contribution to the New York Times at the end of March that really got me steamed as well. Clean coal advocates tried to bolster their technology by knocking down various other technologies. Their two sentence dismissal of solar was especially egregious. I wrote this letter to the editor in response. The NY Times didn't bother to print it so I'll take the liberty of reproducing it here in full. Maybe it will help others expose some of the logical fallacies of clean energy opponents.

To the Editor:

While supportive of new, emerging coal technologies and carbon capture and storage, I believe Thomas Homer-Dixon and S. Julio Friedman were unduly negative - and potentially misleading - about the potential impact of established solar power technology in their recent op-ed. (`Coal in a Nice Shade of Green,' March 25, 2005). They dismissed solar power as needing too much space and being too costly. According to the authors, in order to meet our current electricity demand, the United States would need 10 billion square meters of photovoltaic (PV) panels - a big number indeed, but one without context. Did readers know that the land area of the conterminous 48 states is over 8 trillion square meters or that the built environment in the U.S. covers almost 30 billion square meters? Probably not. Unlike carbon capture and storage, PV panels can be used today on rooftops and integrated into buildings to produce power on site and without carbon dioxide emissions. Costs are still high, but continue to decrease, especially when PV panels replace other building materials like windows or shingles. Over the next 25 years, we will add another 20 billion square meters to the built environment - much of it in the sunny South and West - offering a prime opportunity to build a bridge to a clean energy future.

Sincerely,
Ana Unruh Cohen, Ph.D
Associate Director for Environmental Policy
Center for American Progress
Washington, DC

"The book of nature is always open." - Louis Agassiz

Uranium mining

Another problem with nuclear power is uranium mining. The Navajo Nation has recently banned it on their reservation...

"The book of nature is always open." - Louis Agassiz

As you know by now...

the House and Senate passed a budget last night that could open the Arctic Refuge to oil exploration and extraction. There are still a few more hurdles to clear before that happens, but having gotten over this one the remaining ones are not as daunting.

I had a quick look at the House roll call vote. Not a single Democrat voted for the Republican budget (which may well be a first for the House Democratic caucus) although 7 D's did not vote. That's a pity since the budget passed 214 to 211. Those other 7 could have taken the noes to the magic 218 point and the budget resolution would not have passed... assuming none of the R's who voted no had their arms twisted off and changed their votes to ayes.

"The book of nature is always open." - Louis Agassiz

Like the House proposal with a twist

The President seems to be echoing House legislation that was developed last year and included in the recent House Energy bill, the Refining Revitalization Act. While the Pres went with closed military bases, the House R's would site them in areas that have high unemployment (10% above national average) and either a closed refinery or large manufacturing jobs layoffs. Either way seems like you'd be dumping more pollution in communities that probably already bear more than their fair share of pollution. And who knows if this criteria would even increase capacity where it is needed...

Plus refining capacity is a bit of a red herring in the face of $50 per barrel oil prices. I'm no expert on oil economics, but I happened to talk to one the other day. He hadn't looked at the numbers since 2003 but at that point US gasoline demand was growing slower than companies were adding refining capacity at existing plants. Economics - demand in the future, future price of oil, etc - influence the construction of refineries much more than what environmental regulations have to be met.

If the Pres is serious about solving problems in the refining industry, he might want to look at whether recent mergers are hindering competition and driving up the price for us consumers...

beltway bandit

money matters

MTBE is sure to be a sticking point, but the cost of the bill might be the (grist)millstone around its proverbial neck. The house bill is already a billion plus more than the white house wanted, and Chairman Thomas (of the House Ways and Means - ie tax - Committee) tends to view energy conferences as a time to add up all the tax incentives together, rather than find a compromise. That's the recipe for a bloated bill that can't pass, especially if the economy isn't improving. Hopefully Thomas (and DeLay on MTBE) will stay true to his stubborn self, and this monstrosity of bill will never become law. Hopefully....

beltway bandit

more on the federalism and the environment

Adler was on a panel at the Center for American Progress last month, "How to Protect Environmental Protections?" If you want to read more about federalism, the constitution and environmental protection and what Adler, Robin Kundis Craig and Doug Kendall had to say, check out: http://www.americanprogress.org/site/c.biJRJ8OVF/b.3142/

It's the 7th event down...

beltway bandit

Friends of Ted

Hawaii's Senators are buddies with Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) and they won't cross him on this issue. But in public they say they are supporting the rights of the Kaktovic natives to drill in their lands (which are within the refuge and can't be developed unless the fed lands are developed) and earn money to improve their lives. On Senate votes to open Arctic Refuge to drilling posted 4 years, 8 months ago 9 Responses