Comments siahtam has made

Who's editing gristmill?

I was appalled to see this posted here with that caption.

At least David Roberts had a poignant first comment.

What did the protest accomplish? All the protesters did, in effect, was distract EDF employees for a whole morning.

What does that mean? A couple less hours were spent by EDF employees educating people on the hill about the importance of acting on global warming.

When has cap-and-trade been discredited? Are these protesters going to travel to Seattle next to go after David Roberts and others advocating stringent cap-and-trade policies?

And what's the alternative to cap-and-trade? A tax? They're different means to the same goal, which is to set a price on the negative externalities caused by carbon emssions

Perhaps they're against USCAP, but then why is EDF the target? Why not go protest Jonathan Lash at WRI who was instrumental in starting the coalition or others at NRDC or the National Wildlife Foundation? USCAP right now is the most effective talking point in Washington when lobbying for carbon legislation.On Taking on corporate America's faves posted 11 months, 4 weeks ago 8 Responses

Now over later

Dave, if short-term benchmarks really are what's most important as you said in a previous post then why should we be waiting? There is no guarantee that a dem president would use all their political capital in their first year for passing a lefty climate bill and it might be put on the ropes until say... 2012.

If that's the case then instead of reducing at 2-3% to meet the 2020 benchmarks, we'll have to reduce by 4-5%, and I promise you that will have a much more noticeable impact on our economy.

Though there may be reason to have beef with ED, remember that the Sierra Club has been largely inneffective for the past 25 years.On Is it important to push climate legislation through this year? posted 1 year, 10 months ago 19 Responses

Good points

Thanks for making these points. While L-W isn't the perfect bill, it is a HUGE first step. It will, however, continue to be important to stay focused on the long-term GHG reduction goals for 2050 and even 2100 (!).

In my opinion, the chatter for 80% by 2050 has prevented a more substantive debate from occurring about where L-W actually stands compared to the other bills.

It's also great that you continue to focus on allocation from a fairness standpoint, but it needs to be stated somewhere that allocation does not effect GHG reductions. Even if permits are handed out to corrupt companies, GHG emissions will decline regardless. Too often, I've heard that the scientific consensus indicates that there must be a 100% auction of permits to mitigate the effects of climate change which is completely false and misleading.On On Lieberman-Warner, long-term emissions targets, and picking a trajectory posted 1 year, 11 months ago 11 Responses

What Sanders approval may mean?

Does the fact that Bernie Sanders now approves this bill change some of your opinions that this may actually be a pretty good bill (and may be the best we're going to get for awhile)?On A roundup of today's action in the Senate Environment Committee posted 1 year, 12 months ago 7 Responses

Is this claim true?

What about Super Bowl XLI?
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/super_bowl_stri.p ...

Also, the first carbon-neutral college football game will be this weekend when florida plays florida state.

http://news.ufl.edu/2007/11/20/green-swamp/On Thanksgiving Day game will be carbon neutral posted 2 years ago 4 Responses

What are you advocating for?

If you call carbon trading a scam, what sort of policy should we adopt? Command-and-control emissions cuts? On Why isn't Joe Lieberman scared of Bernie Sanders? posted 2 years ago 2 Responses

The chicken story

You're right Dave that the Slate article does more to confuse people than anything else.

Maybe chicken is better than dairy (and eggs?) in terms of ecological footprint, but how many people out there eat chicken and no dairy? Any?

Also, how much dairy do you have to consume for it to have a larger footprint than a chicken nugget?On Bits and pieces, pieces and bits posted 2 years, 1 month ago 1 Response

What?

"while on the Democratic side, less than a handful of people showed up."

Maybe I'm making too much of this, but this is disconcerting to me. Do the democrats actually want a bill to go through? On America's Climate Security Act gets its first hearing posted 2 years, 1 month ago 1 Response

It's pretty simple...

Passing the 2007 energy bill has required enormous resources for what will take us off the business as usual path but will allow for a continual rise in emissions.

Lieberman-Warner will REDUCE carbon emissions by at least 70% by 2050. Getting this bill passed now will provide huge dividends for the global climate (much, much, much more than the energy bill).

Here are some of my other thoughts:

-If we wait for the "perfect" bill until 2009-2010, several more years will have passed where we continue to emit and the planet continues to warm. Guess what? The emissions that we will continue to emit until the "perfect" bill passes will be in the atmosphere far longer than 2050

-If this bill passes now, a great deal of the groundwork will already be completed for the Bali COP and the US can initiate meaningful conversations.

• Why do we quarrel over the 2050 target? The most important point to take away is that it matches Boxer-Sanders early on. Is there any reason to believe that a piece of environmental legislation will NEVER be amended for 43 years? Of course it will be, and in 2030.... Lieberman, Warner, Boxer, Sanders, Inhofe, and all will have retired.

• Why is anyone listening to these other environmental groups about how we should implement an economic policy (that's quite complicated)? You do know that most of these groups do not have a SINGLE economist on staff. In any other scenario, these groups are willing to publish polemical diatribes against the "market-based" system, but for climate change, we're going to rely on them to tell the public what is the best "market-based" approach for reducing emissions, huh? Is there rational behind this?

I don't think anyone ripped on Olaf

Saint Olaf has initiated a lot of great projects on its campus, and I don't think anyone ripped on them.

I do think it's fair to say that both Carleton and Saint Olaf have been leaders on sustainability issues.On 15 Green Colleges and Universities posted 2 years, 2 months ago 62 Responses