Comments Arjuna has made

  • Auto retrofits - ramping up the technology

    Gar,
    The key here with the auto retrofits is that this is very near-term technology.  This could be ramped-up quickly which would reduce the cost and be widely available.

    Ex-Intel CEO Andy Grove is talking up retrofits too: http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_9741842

    huge opportunity here.On Short, medium, and long-term solutions to phase out oil posted 1 year, 4 months ago 46 Responses

  • Retrofit cars to hybrids

    Another potentially extremely important option is retrofitting existing cars to become hybrids.  The X-Prize candidate Poulsen Hybrid is a promising idea: http://www.climateatbay.net/2008/07/game-changer-hybrid.h ...On Short, medium, and long-term solutions to phase out oil posted 1 year, 4 months ago 46 Responses

  • Missing a key point

    You're missing one of Khosla's central points - parallel hybrids are cost prohibitive - ie: the incremental cost relative to a standard car is going to add several thousand dollars.  That's why he is pushing serial hybrids.  

    There's potentially something to that argument depending on whether mass production of parallel hybrids could drive the cost down faster than alternatives - but the added complexity does suggest his point may be valid. On A pragmatic view of cellulosic biofuels posted 1 year, 10 months ago 5 Responses

  • Demonizing S&N

    I don't see why some people feel compelled to demonize S&N.  They completely acknowledge the terrific challenge and terrible problems we face.

    They have performed a valuable service by asking the movement to examine it's strategies and accurately note that the environmental movement is tilted towards motivating people based on fear rather than inspiration.  This assessment genuinely is a problem.On The right way to interpret Shellenberger & Nordhaus posted 1 year, 10 months ago 10 Responses

  • There are successes starting to emerge

    It's true that MCPA is often signed and followed with no action, but things are happening.  The Sierra Club's Cool Cities campaign (www.coolcities.us) is doing great work to actually move cities.  In San Mateo and Santa Clara counties in CA there are nearly 20 citizen teams pushing their cities to act.  Last year, 10 cities signed, 8 established taskforces or hired consultants, 2 completed their community-wide emissions inventory, 1 adopted a climate action plan -- a start, but more are coming.  And of course, San Jose adopted a bold "Green Vision" setting huge goals like 100% renewable power in 15 years.  Substantive measures like green building standards look imminent in the region.  Other states like NJ, ME, IL, and others have similarly substantial Cool Cities efforts.

    This is "in the trenches" work but things are happening!On Climate treaty among mayors often honored in the breach posted 1 year, 10 months ago 6 Responses

  • Selling "true cost" won't work

    It's important for policy makers to understand "true cost" analysis but that will never work for selling the idea of carbon caps to average americans.  They will always look at the out-of-pocket money because "true cost" is too esoteric a concept to be widely considered.

    It's essential to promote investment and economic benefit as the principal driving "selling points".  Van Jones' Green For All is one example.  People understand the notion of investing in technology, economic stimulation, and energy security. As long as the carbon pricing policy includes clean energy investment as a package then the investment side needs to the the selling point.On True costs of fossil fuels make renewables seem cheap in comparison posted 1 year, 10 months ago 8 Responses

  • another excellent post

    thank you KenOn The winners? ED, NRDC, The Pew Center for Climate Change, and other familiar faces posted 2 years, 4 months ago 4 Responses

  • BTW, thank you

    Ken,
    Thank you for continuing the conversation with your very important and thought provoking columns.On Convincing evidence for the central role of protest and a troubling cost-benefit analysis posted 2 years, 5 months ago 17 Responses

  • Protest & impact - less certain

    The time frame of the analysis is highly problematic since the media landscape has changed so much.  StepItUp does provide a viable model in that context (but not RAN or Greenpeace unless the action is clever enough to go viral) but only if connected to a sustained strategy.

    Everything else has fundamentally changed such that the basic methods of the 60s don't translate to the current conditions.  We do not have charismatic leaders (Gore is most prominent but not charismatic, McKibben is not at that scale).  It's debatable whether we "should" but that's not under our control so let's put that aside.  Churches that are natural allies are aging and shrinking.  The media landscape is fragmented and much of it delegitimized - mass demonstrations, ending up on the front page of the NY Times, or CBS News, etc. simply do not have the impact they once had.

    In a fragmented media landscape, having a lot of people in one place is less effective than having people everywhere - ie: mobilization like StepItUp.  

    But self-organizing groups does not translate to longitudinal effectiveness with out a strategy and that requires an enduring organization.  The weakness of StepItUp is that there is no ongoing organization.  In contrast MoveOn (for example) has an ongoing organization, but the degree of centralization lends itself mostly to a focus on federal legislation and inhibits local organizing and locally adapted strategies.  

    We need both.On Convincing evidence for the central role of protest and a troubling cost-benefit analysis posted 2 years, 5 months ago 17 Responses