Climate & Energy

Netroots on climate and energy

Grist/ReGeneration.org talks to bloggers about how to address the climate and energy challenge

A few more blogger-on-the-street interviews from Netroots Nation. Here’s blogger Liane Allen, who writes at DailyKos and Green Mountain Daily, on climate, energy, and the …

'The most important public policy issue we will face in this generation'

Lessig and Netroots folks on climate change

We’re still here at Netroots Nation in Austin, Texas, where Stanford Law School professor and internet guru Lawrence Lessig just noted that climate change is …

Gore at Netroots Nation? UPDATE: Gore at Netroots Nation!

The hot rumor at the moment is that Al Gore is going to appear at Netroots Nation immediately following Nancy Pelosi’s Q&A session (which is …

Late to the party, but made the last call

Bloggers weigh Gore’s plan in advance of ‘Meet the Press’

Liberals love Gore's gall. Conservatives hate that he drove a gas-guzzler to the big speech. Politicians grumble over his timing. Climate policy wonks and science geeks admire the inititive, but want something a little more ... feasible ... say, 50 to 90 percent renewable electricity by 2020 with a little natural gas for good measure? Across the blogosphere, however, certain questions about Gore's plan remain unanswered. What practical measures will we take to get to zero emission electricity in 10 years? Who will lead the charge? From where will the requisite funds come to finance this energy operation? Will Tom Brokaw grill Gore on "Meet the Press" this Sunday? Or will the Goracle leave the details to those in the political trenches and dodge the pragmatic bullet? The remaining voices:

Ontario joins up with Western carbon cutters

Ontario has joined the Western Climate Initiative, a regional carbon-trading agreement with a goal of cutting greenhouse-gas emissions 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. …

Biofuel for the flames

Are biofuels a core solution?

As part of my ongoing series on core climate solutions (see links below), let's examine biofuels. If we are going to avoid catastrophic climate outcomes, we need some 11 "stabilization wedges" from 2015 to 2040. So if you want to be a core climate solution, you need to be able to generate a large fraction of a wedge in a climate-constrained world. And that is a staggering amount of low-carbon energy. Princeton's Socolow and Pacala describe one wedge of biofuel in their original August 2004 Science article [PDF] on the wedges:

Connecting the dots

A simple regulatory fix to the coming power crisis

Our electric regulatory model is broken. It preferentially deploys expensive power sources before cheap ones. It compares the variable costs of dirty fuels to the all-in costs of clean fuels and deludes itself into thinking that the dirty, expensive power is economically advantaged. It places the interests of utility shareholders above the interests of other potential investors in our power grid, massively skewing capital allocation, even while it insulates utility investors from the disciplines imposed by a competitive market. These problems arise fundamentally from the over-regulation of our electric sector, which has created stable utilities, but virtually no opportunities for the kind of economic "upside" necessary to attract entrepreneurs into the sector. This ought to be good news; after all, we Americans are really good at taking risks, deploying our prodigious entrepreneurial talents and making big financial bets. The problems we face all play to our strengths. Unfortunately, any positive change to our system is by definition deregulatory -- a word that has been politically poisoned by the botched restructuring (don't call it dereg!) in California and Enron's machinations. As factually irrelevant as those bogeymen may be to any discussion of deregulation, they present formidable political obstacles to reform -- and only the most quixotic windmill-tilter chases reforms that are politically untenable to both sides of the aisle. Houston, we have a solution.

Netroots Nation: David talks about energy and the economy

Who’s that grizzled chap in the plaid? It’s our own David Roberts, on a panel earlier today titled “Debunking the Issue Silo Myth: Why the …

The newest denialist talking point

Physicists reaffirm that human-induced GHGs affect the atmosphere

It goes something like this: The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. Of course that's not true. Today a statement appeared on the APS website saying: APS Position Remains Unchanged The American Physical Society reaffirms the following position on climate change, adopted by its governing body, the APS Council, on November 18, 2007: "Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate." An article at odds with this statement recently appeared in an online newsletter of the APS Forum on Physics and Society, one of 39 units of APS. The header of this newsletter carries the statement that "Opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of the APS or of the Forum." This newsletter is not a journal of the APS and it is not peer reviewed. For a list of societies that have endorsed the mainstream position on climate change, see this post.